Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter

Joerg Schilling wrote:

I am not shure if this would match the rules from the Opengroup.
Solaris has these interfaces since at least 5 years.

Surely you're not suggesting that TOG's job is to rubber-stamp bad Solaris decisions...

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: Joerg Schilling <[email protected]>
  • Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: Matthew Frost <[email protected]>

• References:
  • The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
  • Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: Joerg Schilling <[email protected]>
  • Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
  • Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
    • From: Joerg Schilling <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [-mm patch] block/blktrace.c: make blk_trace_cleanup() static
• Next by Date: [2.6 patch] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic79xx_core.c: make ahd_done_with_status() static
• Previous by thread: Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
• Next by thread: Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]