> From: Karl MacMillan [mailto:kmacmillan@mentalrootkit.com]
>
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 09:56 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 09:07 -0400, Karl MacMillan wrote:
> > > My biggest question is how to handle the format change. There are
> > > some other bug fixes awaiting a module format change (not certain
> > > about kernel format change) and it would be nice to
> include those in
> > > this format bump. Unfortunately there are not patches for those
> > > fixes at the moment.
> > >
> > > Could we branch the code for a month or so for the other
> changes can
> > > be introduced or is the fix more critical? Do you think that this
> > > must go into RHEL 5 / FC6? Is it possible for the kernel
> changes to
> > > make it in time for 2.6.18 and if they don't will this be
> included in RHEL 5 / FC6?
> >
> > It doesn't necessarily have to be in 2.6.18 to make RHEL5; consider
> > the MLSXFRM and NetLabel patches, which are being queued for 2.6.19
> > but IIUC will be back ported and included in RHEL5.
> >
>
> I know. I'm trying to get a feel for whether this change is
> critical or the workarounds mentioned in the bug are
> sufficient for now. If it is not critical I'd rather batch
> some other format changes. Otherwise the change should go in
> and potentially be backported if it misses 2.6.18.

I don't think any kernel format changes are planned so the kernel patch can go forward and we can branch off the userland for the changes you are talking about (which ones are those btw?).

--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.