Re: mmap(): MAP_ANON vs. MAP_ANONYMOUS

[Justin Cormack <justin%specialbusservice.com@localhost>]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Richard Hansen <rhansen%bbn.com@localhost> 
wrote:
> NetBSD developers,
>
> The Austin Group (POSIX standards body) is considering standardizing
> mmap() with anonymous memory:
>
>     http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=850
>
> The current draft of the new wording (see comment #2281) uses
> MAP_ANONYMOUS as the name of the mmap() flag.  NetBSD only defines
> MAP_ANON, but otherwise seems conformant to the proposed wording.
>
> Would you be opposed to defining MAP_ANONYMOUS as a synonym for
> MAP_ANON?  Would you prefer POSIX to specify MAP_ANON instead?

I would not be against us adding a synonym; I didn't realise FreeBSD
already had. I admit to forgetting which system uses which and having
to look it up frequently, but slightly prefer MAP_ANON.

Justin