[RFA 3/3] libctf: compilation failure on MinGW due to missing errno values

[Nick Alcock]

On 5 Jan 2020, Joel Brobecker said:
>> I think what makes most sense is to migrate away from using E* constants
>> except for where we reflect the E* return of some underlying call
>> (ENOMEM/EAGAIN from malloc, say). libctf itself should only explicitly
>> set ECTF_* errors it also defines, in the range below ECTF_BASE. While
>> this is technically an API change, no users to date are affected. Here
>> and there this might require extra work for users responding to the
>> errors: e.g. they'd now need to check for ECTF_NOMEM || ENOMEM. However,
>> given that they'd already have to do this for ENOMEM versus EAGAIN I
>> don't consider this much of a problem. :)
>> 
>> Something like this (atop my latest patch series, will write a
>> changelog if people think this makes sense):
>
> I think it makes sense. In fact, it looks very good :-).
>
> Will you let me know when it's pushed to master? We'll want to
> cherry-pick the change on gdb-9-branch as well...

Will do. It'll probably be Friday at the earliest because I want to
properly test it (including on mingw) which means I have to be near my
Windows machine again.

Sorry for the delay...