Re: sys_nerr, sys_errlist

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I suppose there isn't any good reason that elog.c and exc.c refer to
> sys_nerr and sys_errlist directly rather than using strerror()

I don't see any direct references to sys_errlist. The references to
sys_nerr are necessary to avoid coredump with an out-of-range errno
value --- at least on machines where strerror() is a macro that expands
to an unchecked array access.

> an artifact from before port/strerror.c was added?) and given that it is
> provably unportable to do so (Cygwin) I'm inclined to make the obvious
> fix.

I think the obvious fix is to supply a sys_nerr value on Cygwin.

regards, tom lane