# Re: \[PATCH 1/2\] Define ENOAUTHSERVICE to indicate "Authentication service unavailable"

- List: linux-api
- 2 messages, 2 authors
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2012/02/3820061/t

## Re: \[PATCH 1/2\] Define ENOAUTHSERVICE to indicate "Authentication service unavailable"

- From: \<hidden\>
- Date: 2012-02-08 23:54:15 
- Message: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2012/02/3820061.md

```text
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:29:05 GMT, David Howells said:

> +#define	ENOAUTHSERVICE	139	/* Authentication service not available */
>
>  #define EHWPOISON	139	/* Memory page has hardware error */

Was this an intentional overload of 139 (and so on for other archs)?
Just checking - I'm sure if it goes in like this, we'll see a patch to "fix" the
collision for 3.16.0 or so... ;)
```

## Re: \[PATCH 1/2\] Define ENOAUTHSERVICE to indicate "Authentication service unavailable"

- From: David Howells \<dhowells@redhat.com\>
- Date: 2012-02-09 10:01:45 
- Message: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2012/02/3820212.md

```text
Valdis.Kletnieks-PjAqaU27lzQ@public.gmane.org wrote:

> Was this an intentional overload of 139 (and so on for other archs)?  Just
> checking - I'm sure if it goes in like this, we'll see a patch to "fix" the
> collision for 3.16.0 or so... ;)

Ummm...  Odd...  I'm surprised StGIT managed to reapply my patches with no
warning.  I'll fix the numbering in them.

David
```