Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 22:05:41 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r184509 - head/share/man/man9 Message-ID: <20081101212937.D12448@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <200810311447.m9VElFtp083250@svn.freebsd.org> References: <200810311447.m9VElFtp083250@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Robert Watson wrote: > Log: > In style(9) examples of err() and errx(), use sysexits(3) errors rather > than returning 1. style(9) was correct. Using sysexits(3) is a style bug in most cases, especially in err() and errx() messages where there is a text message and not just a cryptic error code. (Originally, in 4.4BSD, sysexits.3 doesn't exist and /usr/src/admin/style/style had no mention of sysexits.h. What /usr/src/admin/style/style had was a rule to not label every error exit with a unique error code, since this gives a large undocumented set of program-specific error codes which no one remembers. Using sysexits gives the same results in practice -- it gives a large documented set of generic error codes which no one remembers, so it was a bug to change the rule from disallowing lots of error codes to encouraging use of sysexits. In 4.4BSD-Lite2, sysexits.3 still doesn't exist, and sysexits.h is only referred to in 11 .c files. This shows that use of sysexits is very unusual in BSD code. Some FreeBSD users like it and added it to style.9 and some FreeBSD .c files, so it is just unusual in FreeBSD code.) Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081101212937.D12448>