Re: [Valgrind-users] Suggested changes to corecheck/tests/sigkill.c

[Dan K. <da...@ke...>]

Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> However, sigaction() will return a negative error code should an error
> occur.  Thus, setting errno = 0 prior to calling sigaction() is unneccessary
> since the return code (not errno) is what that application should be
> checking to determine if an error has occurred.

If you're saying "we don't need to set errno to zero", that's fine.
All I'm pointing out is that your earlier statement, "SuSv3 says
it's illegal to set errno to zero", is false.

> Small details like this are very important for some of the non-Linux porting
> that is underway for valgrind.

Ah, are we porting valgrind to non-Posix-compliant systems
where it's illegal to set errno to zero?
- Dan

-- 
Dan Kegel
http://www.kegel.com
http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045