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

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>I have noticed that the new ...at() system calls are named in what
>>>appears to be a completely haphazard fashion.  In Unix system calls,
>>>an f- prefix means it operates on a file descriptor; the -at suffix (a
>>>prefix would have been more consistent, but oh well) similarly
>>>indicates it operates on a (directory fd, pathname) pair.
>>>
>>
>>shmat operates on dirfd/pathname?
> 
> 
> Do you have a better proposal for naming the interfaces?
> 

Isn't it obvious?  Drop the misleading f- prefixes.

	-hpa