From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Jun 21 11:04:07 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA11457
          for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from aldan.ziplink.net (mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net [24.128.29.55])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA11438
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from mi@rtfm.ziplink.net)
Received: from rtfm.ziplink.net (rtfm [199.232.255.52])
	by aldan.ziplink.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA11619
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:01:12 GMT
	(envelope-from mi@rtfm.ziplink.net)
Received: (from mi@localhost)
	by rtfm.ziplink.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) id OAA11846
	for current@freebsd.org; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:01:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com>
Message-Id: <199806211801.OAA11846@rtfm.ziplink.net>
Subject: NO Bogus errno twiddling by lstat...
In-Reply-To: <199806202002.NAA17957@usr02.primenet.com> from "Terry Lambert" at "Jun 20, 98 08:02:49 pm"
To: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:01:11 -0400 (EDT)
X-Face: 
	%UW#n0|w>ydeGt/b@1-.UFP=K^~-:0f#O:D7w<gv/&E-lL7twZCT8B~/PA4|\t$ti+22K">
		 hJ5G_<5143Bb3kOIs9XpX+"V+~$adGP:J|SLieM31VIhqXeLBli"<kcG^EOVih
		 y+z3/UR{6SCQ
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL39 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Terry Lambert once stated:

=> If, however, you don't like our malloc's current implementation, and
=> think that errno should be saved and restored across a successful
=> call, and that the lost cycles would be worthwhile, then diffs would
=> be perfectly welcome, I'm sure.

Please, excuse the raising of my tail and entering into this
discussion, but at least the subject deserves changing. It would
appear, several people pointed out that there is no "bogus errno
twiddling by lstat".  And the original poster _implicitly_ acknowledged
that and the thread is now discussing something totally different.
We are yet to see an _explicit_ acknowledgment, though...

Sorry for throwing this, but this sort of subject really will look
bad in the archives of my favorite OS, something it does not deserve,
at least in this case. "Oh yeah, see, they had problems in their
lstat-implementation back in 1998".

	-mi

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message