The following architectures appear to lack a reserved system call for LSM: alpha m68k mips64 parisc ppc64 s390 s390x sh sparc sparc64 I'm not sure whether mips64 and ppc64 need a separate number or whether they use the same number as the 32bit version. At the moment the very existance of the sys_security() call is under debate so there's probably no point in submitting a change upstream, but I think it would be good for development purposes if we had a syscall defined for all architectures in the LSM patch. I just uploaded a version of my selinux-small package to Debian with some of the i386 centric issues resolved. I had hoped that it would get auto-built on some other platforms. But so far it has only been attempted on S/390 (where no syscall is defined so the compile aborted). -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page _______________________________________________ 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 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 10:06:17 PST