Dave Bakker

> do you think we should keep the at_ APIs? Or is this change specific to 0.2.x, and we should actually remove the at_ APIs in 0.3? Even for 0.3+,...

That's correct. The current WASI `open-at` is most similar to Linux' `openat2` with `RESOLVE_BENEATH`. To get POSIX `openat` behavior with my POC, is for wasi-libc to prepend the path of...

Ah right. The devil is always in the details. Do you have any ideas on how to go about this in such a way that it can be implemented efficiently...

> I don't think this is a meaningful boundary. All files are reachable from preopens, of which a root preopen is a special case, so there is no isolation, at...

> There are additional questions about how/whether we could handle other signals in wasi:cli. The [referenced issue](https://github.com/WebAssembly/WASI/issues/166) above already goes into some detail on that topic with conclusions like: >...

> what (if any) default behavior should be prescribed for cancellation? For the guest to wrap up ASAP. > Transitively cancel subtasks? Call exit_with_code(130)? Both of those are indeed examples...