Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Of course, I'm not sure what the reasons for all of the other arguments to > this function are since it's not yet implemented. Well, dfd, path and atflags are pretty standard. atflags conveys things like AT_EMPTY_PATH or AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW and dfd conveys a file descriptor pointing to a vfs object or AT_FDCWD. > Seems that attr_values and attr_mask could be compacted to a single > attr_mask maybe? If you don't have a mask, you can't really do recursion. Without the mask, you have to supply the entire set of options absolutely - and this would get stamped on everything in the target range. With a mask in combination with the set of desired values, you can turn on or off a specific subset of the attributes without affecting the rest - without needing to know the rest. David
