On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Greg KH wrote: > Both of those would kill the acceptance of the patch. A statement of opinion, unless you or somebody has already hashed it out with the Kernel Developers. *I* believe that appearing like we know what we're doing and that our patch accurately represents the consensus of the largest possible group of security interested people will have value beyond a few bytes and a few empty pointers that look toward the future. In a negotiation, we might dump the pointers but put them at the end of our structure so we can "reinvigorate" them. Additionally, we gain a few Kernel Developers who can see the benefit but are in the minority, now. > > Let's worry about finishing the original task we set out to do, and not > worry about what happens after that for now. There's still some big > hurdles to overcome to achieve that. My proposal doesn't prevent this. It simply changes the security_ops structure minimally to address other needs. I'm not suggesting you or I or any of the current contributors post patches for hooks that address any of the "non-restrictive" functions. What I *am* doing is trying to suggest a means to acknowlege other interests in the current patch without requiring consensus or effort to address them *now*. If somebody or I come up with a permissive need that requires a patch: we can discuss it on its own merits, and if accepted, it can go in the "permissive" substructure... allowing others to focus on the "Stage I" problem without prohibitting any efforts toward the "Stage X" solutions. It's presented as a compromise, and it's a minimally expensive one. > > > greg k-h > Sincerely, J. Melvin Jones |>------------------------------------------------------ || J. MELVIN JONES jmjonesat_private |>------------------------------------------------------ || Microcomputer Systems Consultant || Software Developer || Web Site Design, Hosting, and Administration || Network and Systems Administration |>------------------------------------------------------ || http://www.jmjones.com/ |>------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jul 13 2001 - 14:01:25 PDT