>>
>> Rhetorically:
>>
>>   Is `sys_errlist' is publicly declared for any reason but backward
>>   compatibility ?
>>
>>   If the answer to the previous question is `NO', then should it not
>>   BE compatible ?

juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de:
> No, yes (my opinion).

All compilers with properly implemented `const' agree that the types
`const char *const[]' and `char *[]' are NOT compatible types.  This
means that your response `yes' to the second question suggests that
the `const' qualifiers SHOULD be removed.

Backward compatibility means compatibility with the era when `sys_errlist'
was required (through the lack of `strerror()') which is (approximately)
the era when `const' was not supported.

I would not labour the point but for the fact that this apparent
contradiction between your response to the `Rhetoric' and the remainder
of your email argues that I am still not making myself clear.