On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 22:21, jmjonesat_private wrote: > 2) you're not willing to actually sell the patch on it's merits, beyond > the assertion that it "meets a (differingly interprettable) statement by > Linus"? Is there THAT much of a rush? I don't think that we need to be in such a hurry, if the people doing the coding (which doesn't mean me) decide that it isn't getting included soon enough then I am sure that they will start promoting their patch. > Is Linux really that "ingrown", that two people make all the decisions? I What is the problem with that? How do you think it should be done? Do you think it should be done the way the commercial Unix vendors do it, with big committees so that nothing gets done? Do you think it should be done the way MS does it, with lots of little groups doing their own thing with no overall design which gives insecure and buggy code? > don't know Alan, but I would never believe that of Linus. I truely think Remember that Linus started it all on his own. Until such a time as someone else who's a seriously good coder decides to fork the kernel (this has been unsuccessfully attempted before - remember the people who wanted to do Linux 3.0 with real time support) then it all comes down to Linus. Linus usually accepts Alan's advice, but can and will over-rule him if he feels it's necessary. > Or, can nobody write a paper that proves the merit? Papers prove nothing. Write a paper on why your kernel patch should be accepted and you can be sure that no-one who's opinion matters will read the paper. I think that the best way towards getting LSM in the main kernel is to get it used more. I'm working on SE Linux support for Debian. The Connectiva people and some independant people are working on RPM package support which will probably be copied by Red Hat. Once Debian and the major RPM distributions support SE Linux and other LSM based security systems there will be increased demand for LSM to become mainstream. -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 22 2002 - 14:13:15 PST