Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: stdio error detection
Message-ID: <1291@sugar.UUCP>
Date: 20 Dec 87 15:33:53 GMT
References: <10649@brl-adm.ARPA> <814@its63b.ed.ac.uk> <1171@nmtsun.nmt.edu>
Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX
Lines: 18

hydrovax@nmtsun.nmt.edu (M. Warner Losh) writes:
> %COPY-F-NOTCOPIED, File FOO.ARD;1 not copied
> -SYSTEM-F-READERR, Fatal read error in device.
> 
> The second part varies tremendously, and can thus tell you that the file
> can't be copied because of file protection, or file lock, or a write error
> in the output, or .......

What's the advantage of this over perror?

cp: foo.ard: I/O error.

The only problem being convincing programmers to USE perror. If you use
perror *as it exists* correctly (i.e., only immediately after an error
return) you have no problems.
-- 
-- Peter da Silva  `-_-'  ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter
-- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.