search for: ex_noinput

...ized, but is widely available nonetheless. If you mean [this sysexits][*], that doesn't seem great for several reasons: 1. "A few programs exit with the following non-portable error codes. Do not use them." 2. The only statuses listed at [*] that could remor be applicable might be `EX_NOINPUT` or `EX_UNAVAILABLE`, but it's arguable that even those are not the meaning that's intended. 3. As you say, "did not become standardized". [*]: https://man.openbsd.org/sysexits -- jim knoble

Corey Hickey wrote in <38d76f8e-0744-4bc5-b6e1-db7197e19ad7 at fatooh.org>: |On 2025-01-10 09:57, Jim Knoble wrote: |>> On Jan 9, 2025, at 19:14, Corey Hickey <bugfood-ml at fatooh.org> wrote: |>> |>> To address this, modify ssh-add to: |>> * [...] |>> * exit with a status of 0 instead of 1 |> |> When Damien wrote: |> |>> Adding

...\ gnu bin sbin usr.bin usr.sbin|wc -l 78 I find it especially notable that some rather new programs use it despite what you say, nvme stuff on FreeBSD, smtpd of OpenBSD... (I use it whenever i can, actually.) |2. The only statuses listed at [*] that could remor be applicable might \ |be `EX_NOINPUT` or `EX_UNAVAILABLE`, but it's arguable that even those \ |are not the meaning that's intended. EX_TEMPFAIL may also be an idea. Yes, sure. That is a real problem. (But hey, let's say 3, or 99!) Like the man page says :) |3. As you say, "did not become standardized". Ye...