From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KgG26-0004WA-9I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:42:42 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KgG24-0004Vg-Op for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:42:41 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52916 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KgG24-0004VZ-I5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:42:40 -0400 Received: from [84.20.150.76] (port=47338 helo=narury.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KgG25-0004DB-9D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:42:41 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:42:34 +0300 From: Riku Voipio Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] add futimesat syscall Message-ID: <20080918094234.GA23737@kos.to> References: <20080917194533.GB21187@kos.to> <20080918063007.GA26841@kos.to> <761ea48b0809180023t37d300ceq790fe33c5ab7602a@mail.gmail.com> <20080918090821.GA17893@kos.to> <20080918092826.GA5059@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080918092826.GA5059@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:28:31PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:08:21PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote: > I don't think that it's great idea. If libc/kernel headers doesn't provide > the syscall we shouldn't implement them. The exception is syscalls without > libc's wrapper. Like gettid(2). Well, defining syscalls appears to be a common practice in qemu for the *at family of syscalls (openat, linkat, ...), so it doesn't seem that far off for futimesat(). -- "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups