* Aleksa Sarai: > On 2020-06-30, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> [CC += Aleksa, linux-man@] >> >> Hello Petr, >> >> I'm bringing Aleksa, the creator of the system call, into CC. >> >> Aleksa, the issue is that the header file (<openat2.h>) documented in >> the manual page that you sent does not (yet) exist (and the bug >> reporter therefore suggests that the manual page should say to include >> <linux/openat2.h>. >> >> I'm guessing that there is (or was) a plan to add a <openat2.h> header >> file to glibc. What is the status? > > Yes, Florian asked me to put the openat2 definitions into a separate > header (openat2.h) so that it could be just copied by glibc rather than > having to do any more hacks around <fcntl.h>. We still need to document the original *at functions. 8-( That's a precondition for adding openat2 (which should come with its own documentation right from the start). <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-May/113545.html> > I guess those plans haven't come to fruition yet? I'm fine with telling > users to use <linux/openat2.h> in the meantime. If we include <linux/openat2.h> from the glibc header, the transition should be unproblematic because there won't be any multi-definition errors. Thanks, Florian
