Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:43:05 +0200 | From | "Michael Kerrisk" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] socket, socketpair w/flags, accept4 |
| |
On 4/25/08, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru> wrote: > Hi. > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 02:20:47PM -0400, Ulrich Drepper (drepper@redhat.com) 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()
| |