From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Feb 26 19:24:09 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id TAA15746
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Feb 1996 19:24:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA15660
          Mon, 26 Feb 1996 19:23:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) id TAA14264; Mon, 26 Feb 1996 19:23:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199602270323.TAA14264@ref.tfs.com>
Subject: Re: gratuitous changes to db/hash.c for threadsafe operation?
To: pst@cisco.com (Paul Traina)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 19:23:29 -0800 (PST)
From: "JULIAN Elischer" <julian@ref.tfs.com>
Cc: julian@freebsd.org, hsu@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org,
        current@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199602270235.SAA25831@puli.cisco.com> from "Paul Traina" at Feb 26, 96 06:35:39 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25 ME8b]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

It clashes with the errno in the thread_safe libc
which is a MACRO
#define errno (*__errno(current_thread))

or something similar
this is true in almost every threads package in the world...

> 
> 
> Does anyone know why the "errno" value in the hash structure was renamed
> to "error"?  This seems to be a gratuitous change that was made to the
> hash code, and I'd like to reverse it out if no one has a particularly
> good reason for its existance.
> 
> You two show up as reviewers of this code, so perhaps you can explain
> it to me?
> 
> I've incorporated the latest version of the db code into the csrg branch
> and would like to bring it into the mainline.  I'll preserve these changes
> if they serve a purpose, but I see none served here after looking at this
> pretty closely, so my default inclination is to revert the code to match
> the original author's.
> 
> Paul
>