From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Tolpin <dvd@davidashen.net>
Message-Id: <200403250708.i2P78MpX060659@adat.davidashen.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] errstr(2)
In-Reply-To: <40628185.4070308@swtch.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:08:22 +0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4091a904-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> >
> >is ERRMAX the 'official' limit on the length of the buffer filled by 
> >errstr? 
> >  
> >
>
> there is no official limit.  that's why you pass your
> own limit to the kernel.  ERRMAX is what the kernel
> is likely to keep around, but it's okay for user and kernel
> to disagree.

I have been unclear. error(5) suggests that messages can be
truncated to ERRMAX. 9/port/generrstr defines the buffer to be 
of ERRMAX bytes long.

The question is whether it means that if I define my buffer to
be ERRMAX bytes long, I am likely to get all the characters the
kernel provides, and the kernel is likely to keep all the characters
I pass to it through errstr(2).

I am asking because errstr(2) mentions neither ERRMAX or error(5),
implies internal use of a fixed length buffer , and does not say
anything about truncating the user string to the size of the system
buffer's limit. 

David