From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Feb 24 01:15:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA02699 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 24 Feb 1998 01:15:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.netcetera.dk (root@sleipner.netcetera.dk [194.192.207.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA02691 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 1998 01:15:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from leifn@image.dk) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by mail.netcetera.dk (8.8.8/8.8.8) with UUCP id KAA27793 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 24 Feb 1998 10:13:20 +0100 Received: by swimsuit.swimsuit.roskildebc.dk (0.99.970109) id AA03865; 24 Feb 98 09:19:53 +0100 From: leifn@image.dk (Leif Neland) Date: 24 Feb 98 08:37:23 +0100 Subject: errormessages Message-ID: <2d4_9802240919@swimsuit.swimsuit.roskildebc.dk> Organization: Fidonet: Swimsuit Safari. Go for it. To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Why dont errormessages contain an unique errornumber too? Like: "foo: Error#13: Smurf seriously overgulfed" "foo: Error#14: Smurf somewhat undergulfed" Then it would be easier to find the error, when somebody on the mailinglists writes "Hey, I got this message something like the Smurf was gulfed". An unique errornumber including the filename of the executable which generated it is much easier to write down too... A database of errormessages, explanations and fix'ems would be easier to search. Perhaps the numbers should be higher than the standard unix errornumbers to avoid confusion. Leif Neland leifn@image.dk --- |Fidonet: Leif Neland 2:234/49 |Internet: leifn@image.dk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message