Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 00:13:57 +0000 From: "Wall, Stephen" <stephen.wall@redcom.com> To: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Subject: Re: RFC: should copy_file_range(2) remain Linux compatible or support special files? Message-ID: <MN2PR09MB4876F76163F8DA9276486AF9EE340@MN2PR09MB4876.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> In-Reply-To: <YTBPR01MB3966966F82008C9E471708FCDD370@YTBPR01MB3966.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> References: <YTBPR01MB3966966F82008C9E471708FCDD370@YTBPR01MB3966.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Could the as yet unused options param have a bit assigned to trigger the ne= w behavior? Inform the linux community of the addition and let them decide= if they would like to adopt it as well.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?MN2PR09MB4876F76163F8DA9276486AF9EE340>