Re: openat/fstatat functions implementation

[der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> I still think that we should not start spreading *at() syscalls, but
>> rather have one syscall to handle them.  While it is pointless to
>> dholland, I would say it is a better structure and would probably
>> reduce some code duplication.
> But it would make trace display annoying.

Only if traces are done naïvely.  There's no reason the code couldn't
generate more useful syscall trace records - I'd say TRT here would be
to generate a record for the "inner" call as if on its own, but
bracketed by records for the wrapping.

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B