* H. Peter Anvin: > I have to say I'm skeptic to the need for umask2() as opposed to > getumask().
I find the extension with a set-the-thread umask somewhat unlikely. How would a potential per-thread umask interact with CLONE_FS? Have a per-thread umask that, when active, overrides the global one, similar to what uselocale provides? That seems rather messy, and I'm not aware of any precedent.
