'Christoph Hellwig' wrote: >There's no one taking away the LSM patches. Are you volunteering to maintain those patches and keep them up to date with the mainline kernel, then? There's a reason why LSM is needed. A few other projects tried maintaining their own patches, but they largely collapsed under the weight of doing so, and they got almost no deployment because of the deployment difficulties of maintaining a separate branch in the kernel. People have tried doing what you propose. They failed. Keeping separate patches is a costly way to go. My prediction is that it would kill all but the most well-funded security projects. Maybe some would consider that a good thing, but it's a cost we shouldn't ignore. _______________________________________________ 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 : Wed Feb 12 2003 - 14:26:24 PST