From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-87549-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 9756 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2012 12:36:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 9650 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jan 2012 12:36:52 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il (HELO mtaout20.012.net.il) (80.179.55.166)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:36:37 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LYG00500IJJ0X00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:36:36 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.102.195]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LYG005WLJ0ZG700@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:36:36 +0200 (IST)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:47:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: fix build error on MinGW (HAVE_READLINK) undefined
In-reply-to: <4F2296E7.1090705@redhat.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: asmwarrior@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83d3a5z5lz.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <4F2206DE.20907@gmail.com> <83k44dzejs.fsf@gnu.org> <4F22760A.2020309@redhat.com> <83ehulz77q.fsf@gnu.org> <4F2296E7.1090705@redhat.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00946.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:21:59 +0000
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
> CC: asmwarrior@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> > But isn't ENOSYS sub-optimal in this case?  Systems that don't have
> > readlink don't have symlinks, either.  
> 
> Not necessarily true.  Might have symlinks but not a defined MAXPATHLEN,
> for example (I guess the Hurd may fall on that basked).

Could use PATH_MAX instead.  No problem here.

> E.g., if the file does not exist, we should return ENOENT instead.

We could check that as well, and return ENOENT.

> >>   *target_errno = FILEIO_ENOSYS;
> >>   return NULL;
> >> #endif
> > 
> > Which is wrong, don't you think?
> 
> I don't.

Too bad.  In my experience, saying "this is not a symlink" does TRT
more often than not.