Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:25:39 +0200 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface |
| |
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 08:37:27AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting James Morris (jmorris@namei.org): > > On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > > > It's already pretty clear. > > > > > > I doubt anyone not on lkml or linux-security-module has heard of this. > > > > > > So we'll see. > > > > > > (I was, obviously, talking about end-users) > > > > If distributions are shipping binary modules and other out of tree code to > > their users, then they should bear responsibility for supporting and > > maintaining the infrastructure required for it, and not expect upstream > > maintainers to do it for them. > > > > Additionally, if they want to expose their users to risks arising from > > broken and unecessary infrastructure, then they should bear the cost and > > responsibility of doing that and not expect others to do so as well. > > > > I don't see how this is even slightly difficult to understand. > > I'm not talking about distros - I don't see how this is even slightly > difficult to understand :) > > The situation I have in mind is someone who decideds to use, say, SLIM, > but wants to otherwise use the distro kernel. >...
AFAIR this does anyway not work because at least the version of SLIM that once was in -mm required some patching of the kernel.
> -serge
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
- 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/
| |