Re: [PATCH selftest fails!] m68k: Wire up execveat

[Re-send from a different email address because I apparently can't send 
plaintext from gMail on my phone.]

On 21 Dec 2014 09:37, "Andreas Schwab" [off-list ref] wrote:
 >

Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] writes:

 > Check success of execveat(5,
'xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy', 0)... [FAIL] (child 792
exited with 126 not 127)

POSIX says
(http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html#tag_18_08_02):

     If a command is not found, the exit status shall be 127. If the
     command name is found, but it is not an executable utility, the exit
     status shall be 126.

 > Andreas.
 >

That sounds like a bit of a grey area -- is ENAMETOOLONG nearer to 
ENOENT or EACCES?   Maybe it's best to make the test allow either (given 
that it's not a test of shell behaviour).

I can update the test to do that, but it probably won't be until the new 
year I'm afraid.

David