Russ Allbery via RT <rt-comment@krbdev.mit.edu> writes:
> rainer weikusat@sncag com via RT <rt-comment@krbdev.mit.edu> writes:

>> Presumably, because it returns a totally random synthetic system error
>> that bears absolutely no relation to the condition that caused it?
>> (keytab w/o kvno)

> Well, no, more because I think it's cleaner to detect EOF from the
> function return than explicitly call feof.  It may well be that your
> choice of error code is better; that's a very good point.

And actually, now that I look at this more closely, I do see why you did
that.  Advocacy withdrawn; I think your approach is better since it isn't
subject to possible garbage in errno before this code runs.

I'll update the patch in Debian to use the same approach.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>