On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Crispin Cowan wrote: > IMHO, the "patch" approach is useless. We might as well revert to > distributing individual patches for our projects. Actually, this isn't entirely true. Although our goal is definitely to gain acceptance into the mainstream kernel (if necessary as a configuration option), the LSM patch might still be a worthwhile investment even if it were rejected. Rather than each of us needing to maintain our own kernel patch, the various security projects could jointly maintain the LSM patch (thereby reducing the individual burden on each project). This would allow each of us to spend more time on our individual security modules. It also fosters exchange of ideas between the security projects and provides more eyes inspecting the kernel patch. -- Stephen D. Smalley, NAI Labs ssmalleyat_private _______________________________________________ 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 : Wed Aug 15 2001 - 09:58:51 PDT