Re: [PATCH] accept4: Support SOCK_NONBLOCK, if defined

[Bruno Haible]

Eric Blake wrote:
> Hmm, I guess it would be better to make the accept4 module depend on
> nonblocking

I would not like this. The 'nonblocking' module is quite intrusive
(it hooks into many stdio functions, from 'getchar' to 'fprintf').
Few applications use nonblocking file, pipe, or sockets. The majority
of the applications should not be suffering from the complexities of
this module.

Bruno