On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Emily Ratliff wrote: > This is great and I expect it to be a resource that module writers will > want to use, but I'd like for them not to have to read SELinux > documentation to get the info they need to develop modules. Are you > planning on putting some of that content into the LSM document? If so, I > will wait for that, but if not, I'd like to go ahead and get some basic > information about module writing into the LSM document. I wasn't trying to deter you from adding such content to the LSM document, just letting you know about our ongoing documentation efforts. Feel free to work on such content. When our SELinux module documentation is ready and released, then either you or we can consider whether anything else in it might be useful for the general LSM document. > Do you think that adding an even more basic paragraph (for example, > one that indicates that module writers should look at capability_plug and > dummy_plug as examples and that the modules must implement each hook > specified in security.h) would be insultingly trivial or would be valuable > as pointing to how to get started? I think that the current LSM document points people to the dummy security module and the capability security module, but you can remind them again if you want in your section. -- 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 : Fri Oct 26 2001 - 13:32:30 PDT