From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 26 16:19:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F341B106566C for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:19:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jamie@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gritton.org (gritton.org [161.58.222.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B599B8FC0C for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:19:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jamie@FreeBSD.org) Received: from glorfindel.gritton.org (c-76-27-80-223.hsd1.ut.comcast.net [76.27.80.223]) (authenticated bits=0) by gritton.org (8.13.6.20060614/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n6QGJkud020534; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:19:47 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4A6C8221.6000807@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:19:45 -0600 From: Jamie Gritton User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090220) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kostik Belousov References: <4A6B0BD3.6040206@protected-networks.net> <4A6B9A60.90302@FreeBSD.org> <4A6BAC1A.5080303@protected-networks.net> <20090726120608.GE55190@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20090726122230.E245@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <4A6C67F5.8080408@FreeBSD.org> <20090726144227.GK55190@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4A6C6D27.2030500@FreeBSD.org> <20090726151245.GM55190@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <20090726151245.GM55190@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , freebsd-stable Subject: Re: regression with jexec? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:19:49 -0000 Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 08:50:15AM -0600, Jamie Gritton wrote: >> All true - and I'll add the check you mention to my patch. >> >> But what about the malloc case? Is it equally valid to say that errno >> should not be set when no error occurred? Or are non-syscall libc >> functions generally given free reign to overwrite errno in non-error >> situations? > > Yes, they have a blanket to override errno when no error is returned to > the caller. Malloc is good example. > > Errno is defined only after error. OK then, patching jexec is all that needs doing; I'll get that in. - Jamie