From owner-freebsd-standards Wed Feb 6 14:31:50 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from opus.sandiegoca.ncr.com (tan7.ncr.com [192.127.94.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D9737B422 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:31:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by opus.sandiegoca.ncr.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g16MZfZ09176; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:35:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chuckr@opus.sandiegoca.ncr.com) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:35:41 -0800 (PST) From: Chuck Rouillard To: "Tim J. Robbins" Cc: , Chuck Rouillard Subject: Re: pathchk - review In-Reply-To: <20020206195629.A37672@descent.robbins.dropbear.id.au> Message-ID: <20020206142317.S9114-100000@opus.sandiegoca.ncr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Tim J. Robbins wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 11:54:26PM -0800, Chuck Rouillard wrote: > > > A revised `pathchk' is being submitted for review. [snip] > In pathchk.c, I think it'd be better to use the warn and err family of > functions instead of fprintf and perror ("Use err(3) or warn(3), do not roll > your own.") Well, I chose fprintf and perror for appearance reasons. The SUS spec. says we must indicate the error detected and the offending pathname. The appearance issue arises when _long_ pathnames are encountered and, by design, the err/warn family of functions -appends- the error string. Thus, the error string seems lost when appended to such _long_ pathnames. Use of fprintf elsewhere is solely for consistency. Thoughts? > Other than those few nits, it looks fine. Thanks! > Tim > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message