elm 2.5.3 and glibc 2.1.93

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 07:31:41AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 10:13:46AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > |> 
> > |> It looks like elm 2.5.3 may check errno even when fcntl returns 0.
> > 
> > This is broken.  The value of errno is only defined if the syscall failed.
> > 
> 
> Elm may be broken. But it is no excuse for glibc to mess with errno.

Why should glibc work around bugs in broken packages?

	Jakub