> Not really; remember that the program also gets the _size_ with it, so the
> shared library will already supply the number of errors in sys_nerr, which
> is the correct number of errors in sys_errlist[].  It's not incompatible
> that I can see; perhaps I missed something?

Paul was talking about *the size of the object sys_errlist[]*, not the
`size' represented by sys_nerr.  Only enough space for the old
sys_errlist[] is allocated in the executable's data segment; the new
definition is too long and ends up overwriting other objects in the
data segment.

For future reference: Paul wrote our shared library implementation.
If your opinion disagrees with his, you're probably wrong.