Re: errno bug?

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:

> E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
>
> > Ross Smith wrote:
> >
> > > As several people have already explained to you,
> > > you are not allowed to write 
> >
> > I didn't write "extern int errno".
> > It appears in already existing (now broken) code.
>
> [examples]
>
> You are right, that code is now broken. However, a single, global errno is
> useless in a multithreaded context - the mentioned function uses
> thread-local storage.
>
> I hope you now understand why the extern int declaration was deprecated,

I have always understood that.

> else I feel sympathetic with you, 
> but fixing that code will probably be easy.

For someone -- not me.
It isn't my code that includes these declarations.

I just didn't know whether you had made a conscious decision
to break all of the already existing code
or whether you had simply introduced a bug
by appending 'throw()' to your

        extern int *__errno_location (void);

declaration in

        /usr/include/bits/errno.h