elm 2.5.3 and glibc 2.1.93

[H . J . Lu]

On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 10:27:46AM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> 
> > >From here, I conclude "The glibc functions do not change `errno' when
> > they succeed." By not saving/restoring errno, we have changed
> > documented glibc behavior. We should be consistent on it.
> 
> I've not written this and it is a stupid assumption.  errno must be

You may not have written it. But it is there and used to be accurate. 
Users may do many stupid things. But I won't call reading and following
the glibc manual is stupid. What I am afraid of is elm may not be the
only one.


H.J.