Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-security-module@...>, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...>, Thomas Fricaccia <thomas_fricacci@...>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...>, James Morris <jmorris@...>, Crispin Cowan <crispin@...>, Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@...>, Alan Cox <alan@...>
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 07:11:17PM +0100, Simon Arlott wrote:
Generally, the goal is to get external modules included into the kernel.
You want to be able to have this functionality and you do not want to
use SELinux for it.
But instead of working on getting your code into the kernel you are
requesting that an API making it easier for you to maintain it
externally comes back.
There are other points in this thread that might or might not warrant
making LSM modular again, but even though it might sound harsh breaking
external modules and thereby making people aware that their code should
get into the kernel is IMHO a positive point.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
