Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 43692 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2000 18:54:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 43672 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2000 18:54:46 -0000 Message-ID: <00bc01bf9ff9$e7619b70$c1e01b09@raleigh.ibm.com> From: "Bill Stoddard" To: References: Subject: Re: Errno code in APR again. Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 14:57:06 -0400 Organization: IBM Corp. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > Well, first of all this is ugly. But there is no help for that. The fact > is that most unix's define these two values to be the same. If there are > some IMHO brain-dead unix's that don't, we have a way to fix this. I'd say a system that treated these differently is working in the spirit of the Unix designers who originally came up with these errnos. Why else would they have both? So, either the systems that treat these the same are brain dead or the original designers are brain dead for thinking they needed both :-). Just kidding of course. Unix design is! Let's not be too judgmental! Bill