In article <[email protected]>,
Robert Swindells  <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>What is wrong with your idea of updatesockopt(2) ? Or maybe call it
>getsockopt2() and only use it for the "get with extra argument" case.

I guess getsockopt2/updatesockopt is not that bad after all. Perhaps
we should go with that?

christos

Reply via email to