From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261820AbTEZRNy (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 May 2003 13:13:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261861AbTEZRM3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 May 2003 13:12:29 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:37642 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261820AbTEZRL5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 May 2003 13:11:57 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 10:11:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Adrian Bunk cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [2.5 patch] Change strlcpy and strlcat In-Reply-To: <20030526132955.GC9104@fs.tum.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 26 May 2003, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Your API is compatible with *BSD but I'm wondering whether something > slightly different might make error handling for callers easier: Well, judging by the fact that pretty much 99.9% of all users won't ever care about the return value. And coupled with the fact that the current behaviour is compatible with BSD (except for the BUG_ON() that I added, and I have no idea what BSD does for that case, since it pretty clearly _is_ a bug), I definitely prefer having standard return values than trying to make it "easier". The BSD return values do actually make sense for nested operations. Linus