From: "Theo de Raadt" Subject: Re: Missing errno # 71 in man errno To: Ingo Schwarze Cc: Angelo Rossi , tech@openbsd.org, jsg@openbsd.org Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 12:45:25 -0600 The vague POSIX number/name for EREMOTE has nothing to do with the error condition in inteldrm(4). It has to do with path handling, probably NFS, it is very unclear. I suspect what's going on here is the driver wants to provide a unique error number for a failure condition which will print a different (obscure, but different) error message to a user or an unknown test program. So they chose EREMOTE, rather than ENOMEDIUM or EBADRPC or 37373. We could document it, but that changes nothing. POSIX has become infected with the idea of copying errno names from various systems without clearly identifing which operations return it in which conditions, and this has turned into a trashfire where many system calls can return pretty much any error value, and applications can only do specific behaviour for a handful of errnos, the rest they either consider (all?) fatal or (all?) ignorable. That's the state of the art.