Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757340AbYAPAWa (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:22:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752477AbYAPAWW (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:22:22 -0500 Received: from ms0.nttdata.co.jp ([163.135.193.231]:44945 "EHLO ms0.nttdata.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751585AbYAPAWV (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:22:21 -0500 Message-ID: <478D4E35.8000208@nttdata.co.jp> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:22:13 +0900 From: Kentaro Takeda User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Serge E. Hallyn" CC: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Tetsuo Handa , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [TOMOYO #6 retry 02/21] Add struct vfsmount to struct task_struct. References: <20080109005320.323184643@nttdata.co.jp> <20080109005418.469053691@nttdata.co.jp> <20080115211656.GA10644@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20080115211656.GA10644@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 00:22:17.0827 (UTC) FILETIME=[DA113330:01C857D5] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1177 Lines: 33 Hello. Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > I must say I personally prefer the apparmor approach. No problem. > But I'd recommend > you get together and get this piece pushed on its own, whichever version > you can agree on. TOMOYO can use AppArmor's patch. > Yes it needs a user, but at this point I would think > both tomoyo and apparmor have had enough visibility that everyone knows > the intended users. Not only AppArmor and TOMOYO but also SELinux want to use "vfsmount". (http://marc.info/?l=selinux&m=120005904211942&w=2) > It seems to me you're both being held up by this piece, and getting > another full posting of either tomoyo or apparmor isn't going to help, > so hopefully you can combine your efforts to get this solved. We welcome AppArmor's vfsmount patches, but I wonder why AppArmor's vfsmount patches are not merged yet. What prevents AppArmor's vfsmount patches from merging into -mm tree? Regards. Kentaro Takeda -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/