Re: [PATCH -mm 3/3] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security

Quoting Chris Wright ([email protected]):
> * Adrian Bunk ([email protected]) wrote:
> > You want to build these modules always and always modular?
> > 
> > No matter whether the security subsystem is built modular or static?
> > 
> > No matter whether the user has enabled or completely disabled the 
> > security subsystem?
> 
> The modules are just for testing, and shouldn't be added at all.

Right, in no way should the testing modules be upstreamed :)

thanks,
-serge
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH -mm] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 3/3] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 3/3] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 3/3] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
    • From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 3/3] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
    • From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC] RT-patch update to remove the global pi_lock
• Next by Date: Include assembly entry points in TAGS
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH -mm 3/3] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH -mm] [LSM] Stacking support for inode_init_security
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]