--- Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 01:16:18AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > reviewed the August thread from your version 1 submission and the message I > > take away is that the code has been well-received and looks good when > > considered on its own merits, but selinux could probably be configured to > > do something sufficiently similar. > > > > I'd have trouble declaring that "but" to be a reason to not merge smack. > > I'm more thinking "let's merge it and see if people use it". > > I'm not sure this was discussed on the list, but as long as Casey doesn't > get rid of the magic symlinks (smackfs_follow_link), there's a clear NACK > from the VFS perspective.
OK, this is news to me. What's the objection? > Otherwise the code looks pretty well written, alhough a run through > checkpath.pl to fix the lose end might help. Oh, and please to compile-time > initializations for the spinlocks and mutex currently initializes in > smack_init. Also the -Inet/netlabel looks rather odd, please work with > the netlabel maintainer to move the required files to the include/ > hierachy. Paul and I discussed this earlier, and will again. Thank you. Casey Schaufler [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
