Re: stackable modules

From: jmjonesat_private
Date: Wed May 23 2001 - 12:32:07 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "2001_05_23 patch against 2.4.4"

    On Wed, 23 May 2001 sarnoldat_private wrote:
    > jmjones was not suggesting that the virgin kernel (is "core kernel"
    > better?) 
    Depends on what you think about virgins and cores :)  ... oy, I'm not
    going there.
    > should be charged with marshalling the chaining. Instead, by
    > providing some simple hooks, it is hoped to provide a more standard
    > method of handling module multiplexing for those modules that wish to
    > work with other modules. The first loaded module would be in charge of
    > handling any chaining, or other aggregation techniques. Not the virgin
    > kernel.
    Well said.  I have to admit I didn't start exactly there, but was nudged
    into the right place pretty quickly (just a sort of a mind-flip and I 
    was into the time-slip...)  Was kinda lucky I was "off" by a very small
    amount and others were a few steps ahead of me.
    > I hope I got jmjones's position correct; I trust he will correct me
    > where I am wrong. :)
    Uh oh.  I'm getting a reputation.  Will try only to turn into the 
    "Correctional Hulk" to battle the forces of evil, and remain "mild
    mannered David Banner" for most of the future.
    J. Melvin Jones
    ||  J. MELVIN JONES            jmjonesat_private 
    ||  Microcomputer Systems Consultant  
    ||  Software Developer
    ||  Web Site Design, Hosting, and Administration
    ||  Network and Systems Administration
    linux-security-module mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 23 2001 - 12:33:42 PDT