Re: syscall numbers

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Sat Dec 07 2002 - 11:18:33 PST

  • Next message: Russell Coker: "Re: syscall numbers"

    On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 07:04:15PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
    > 
    > 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.
    
    There's no more debate, the syscall is dead.
    
    thanks,
    
    greg k-h
    _______________________________________________
    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 - 11:20:28 PST