X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<26287360.post@talk.nabble.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:07:27 -0800 (PST)
From:	aputerguy <nabble AT kosowsky DOT org>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	getfacl returns 0 if no file found
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

This is inconsistent with Linux treatment  - is that what we want?
Because it would be good to be able to trap this as an error.

$ getfacl sfdsfdsfdsf
getfacl: sfdsfdsfdsf: No such file or directory
$ echo $?
0 (cygwin)
1 (linux)
-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/getfacl-returns-0-if-no-file-found-tp26287360p26287360.html
Sent from the Cygwin list mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -