* Tom Lane wrote:
> Christian Ullrich <chris@chrullrich.net> writes:
>> Anyway, I think Michael's fix is wrong. The bug is that the Win32
>> version of link() (at the bottom of zic.c) does not set errno if its
>> attempt to copy the file fails, so what dolink() puts into link_errno is
>> bogus.
>
> Ah-hah, that explains things nicely. The previous coding in dolink()
> wasn't so dependent on link() returning a valid errno on failure.
>
>> Patch attached.
>
> But then, should not this code make sure that errno *always* gets set?
A library function that does not fail does not touch errno. This link()
replacement is an honorary library function, so neither should it.
> I'd be inclined to think we should use _dosmaperr(), too, rather than
> hand-coding it.
Yes, of course. If only I had known about it ...
New patch attached.
--
Christian
