Re: [PATCH 1/1] libstdc++: Deal with ENOSYS == ENOTSUP

[Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot ibm dot com>]

On 3/6/20 10:15 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 at 10:41, Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> zTPF uses the same numeric value for ENOSYS and ENOTSUP.
>>
>> Ok for mainline?
>>
>> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2020-03-06  Andreas Krebbel  <krebbel@linux.ibm.com>
>>
>>         * src/c++11/system_error.cc: Omit the ENOTSUP case statement if it
>>         would match ENOSYS.
>> ---
>>  libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/system_error.cc | 3 ++-
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/system_error.cc b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/system_error.cc
>> index 7844afe6d2a..1f06e67feea 100644
>> --- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/system_error.cc
>> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/system_error.cc
>> @@ -251,7 +251,8 @@ namespace
>>  #ifdef ENOTSOCK
>>        case ENOTSOCK:
>>  #endif
>> -#ifdef ENOTSUP
>> +#if defined ENOTSUP && (!defined ENOSYS || ENOTSUP != ENOSYS)
> 
> Hmm, what system does not have ENOSYS but has ENOTSUP? Meaning the
> !defined ENOSYS
> bit?
> 
None that I know about. It is just to make sure the compare afterwards operates on defined inputs.

Andreas