Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:47:36 +0200 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
| |
Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:24:42PM -0700, Thomas Fricaccia wrote: > >> Yes, I think Crispin has succinctly summed it up: irrevocably closing >> the LSM prevents commercial customers from using security modules other >> than that provided by their Linux distributor. >> > > Any "customer" using a security model other than provided by their Linux > distributor instantly voided all support from that distro by doing that. > > So, since the support is gone, they can easily build their own kernels, > with their own LSM interfaces, and get the exact same lack of support :) > >
Running a vendor kernel has the advantage of reusing all the QA work that has gone into that kernel. It is very different from running 2.6.24-rc1 (or 2.6.22.x). Hence projects like centos: you don't get any support, but the likelihood of actually requiring support is lower than running some random kernel.
[but I agree that someone who has somehow determined that they need a specific LSM will probably have determined that they need vendor support as well]
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |