[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tar fails with 256
- To: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: Tar fails with 256
- From: Seth Arnold <sarnold_(_at_)_willamette_(_dot_)_edu>
- Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 13:50:29 -0800
- Mail-followup-to: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
* John Smith <pagemaster41_(_at_)_hotmail_(_dot_)_com> [001105 13:27]:
> Holy sh** then would you please realize what I want is exactly what I said,
> I don't want help making it work or advice I would just have liked someone
> to tell me what error 256 meant.
*sigh*. Please remember what I said about being polite.
tar(1) only mentions two error return statuses -- 0 and 1. Therefore,
there is a good chance the shell invoked to run tar(1), or the
application that invoked tar(1), mangles error return values so that it
can use error return values as well, but still preserve whatever error
message the programs it called were giving. [How's that for an obtuse
So, if you want to find out what exactly 256 means, you need to figure
out the order of how programs were called, and which program gives you
what number, so that you can check its documentation and find out what
the various error numbers mean. (If the program that ran was make(1),
note that it executes rules using sh(1) unless it has been told
otherwise, either through your environment variables or through rules in
Or, another approach, is to say, "ok, I got a non-zero error from
tar(1), but tar(1) gives errors 0 and 1. tar(1) must have given error 1,
and some other process mangled it before it was passed on to me." This
approach is sometimes right, but leaves you feeling a little unsure
about the whole setup.
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all really
impressed down here, I can tell you.''