Re: Binary only module overview

• Previous message: Stephen Smalley: "[PATCH] Support for stacking capabilities with SELinux (Was: Re: I can ' t use named on LSM-based Prototype. Why?)"
• In reply to: Greg KH: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Next in thread: jmjonesat_private: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Reply: jmjonesat_private: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> So in your opinion, would making the LSM public functions use
> GPL_EXPORT_SYM (when it is available) increase the odds of the patch
> being accepted into the kernel?

Not sure - thats a Linus question

_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module

• Next message: jmjonesat_private: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Previous message: Stephen Smalley: "[PATCH] Support for stacking capabilities with SELinux (Was: Re: I can ' t use named on LSM-based Prototype. Why?)"
• In reply to: Greg KH: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Next in thread: jmjonesat_private: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Reply: jmjonesat_private: "Re: Binary only module overview"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 15:48:38 PDT