bug#13409: [patch] make some error messages clearer

2013-01-17 Thread Paul Eggert
On 01/17/13 05:49, Pádraig Brady wrote: > In fact it's very common to search for "error" > in log files, which I do all the time looking > for make errors in build logs. Even when compiling error.c, verror.c, xstrtol-error.c, etc.? :-) I use Emacs's standard regular expressions to find errors li

bug#13447: ln "" foo gives misleading error message

2013-01-17 Thread Jim Meyering
Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 01/15/2013 02:27 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Pádraig Brady wrote: >> ... I could go either way. There is precedent, but it's such a corner case, it may not be worth the added code. >>> >>> given the confusion above, it might be worth the >>> clarification err

bug#13447: ln "" foo gives misleading error message

2013-01-17 Thread Eric Blake
On 01/15/2013 07:15 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > [adding the Austin Group] > > > What do others on the Austin Group think about an empty string for path1 > in symlink()? Current Linux rejects the symlink() call with ENOENT; > FreeBSD 8.2 allows it but refuses to resolve the symlink ("ln -s '' a && >

bug#13409: [patch] make some error messages clearer

2013-01-17 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 01/10/2013 08:06 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: On 01/10/13 11:20, Benno Schulenberg wrote: Several error messages in some of the utilities say things like "reading %s". They sound like progress messages, and translators might be tempted to translate them as if they said "busy reading %s" -

bug#13447: ln "" foo gives misleading error message

2013-01-17 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 01/15/2013 02:27 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: Pádraig Brady wrote: ... I could go either way. There is precedent, but it's such a corner case, it may not be worth the added code. given the confusion above, it might be worth the clarification error message. Yes, I've demonstrated that rather we

bug#13391: dd silently ignores lseek error

2013-01-17 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 01/09/2013 10:08 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: On 01/09/2013 07:36 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote: why not check input_seekable where it is set - ~60 lines above? I was trying to keep related code together. Thanks for all the reviews, which I've fixed locally. To provide an argument for why this