> 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?
