Re: [PATCH] socket, socketpair w/flags, accept4

[Michael Kerrisk]

On 4/25/08, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
>  On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 02:20:47PM -0400, Ulrich Drepper (drepper@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>  > The code changes are really minimal.  And don't get too hung up on the
>  > internal name of the syscall.  I think accept4 is more desriptive than
>  > paccept since a) suffixes more easily indicate derived functionality
>  > and b) the 4 actually indicates to the initiated what has changed.
>  > If there are good reasons otherwise the userlevel interface can still
>  > be something completely different.
>
>
> What about sigset there too?

Right.  That was what I was understanding that Alan referred to when
he was talking about paccept()
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/