lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Upstream first policy
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kyle McMartin wrote:
>>
>> I recommend you don't look at Ubuntu, we might have a lot of extra
>> crud[2] in the kernel if you do. :) (Actually, shockingly less than I
>> thought, just apparmor, aufs, ndiswrapper are the obvious ones.)
>
> Ok, so ndiswrapper falls under the "yeah, no" heading.
>
> But apparmor was supposed to be on the "yeah, we'll merge it" path, I
> talked to somebody about it not _that_ long ago. Some of the security
> people object, but they object for all the wrong reasons and I really do
> think that since it's getting used, we really should merge it.

The AppArmor developer has been posting patches for review -- there's
nothing stopping the code being merged except for the need to address
purely technical issues raised by reviewers, which is ongoing.

See: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.lsm/10443

> Although there was _some_ noise about Ubuntu trying to move away from
> it.. But that may have been more of the whole FUD thing from the people
> who for some unfathomable reason think that inodes are more important
> than pathnames.

Hey, thanks for another random unfounded personal attack, it's really
appreciated.


- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-03-07 22:27    [W:0.547 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site