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

>> >Do you have a better proposal for naming the interfaces?
>>
>> chownfn maybe. (fd + name)
>
>I am not shure if this would match the rules from the Opengroup.
>Solaris has these interfaces since at least 5 years.
>
This is not the cdrecord thread so Solaris is a no-go in this very one.



Thank you,
Jan Engelhardt
-- 
| Software Engineer and Linux/Unix Network Administrator
| Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/
| jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/
-
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: "H. Peter Anvin" <[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: Re: LibPATA code issues / 2.6.15.4
Next by Date: [PATCH] x86_64 Early initialization of cpu_to_node
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]