> I should point out that the realtime preempt stuff is HIGHLY > experimental still! Oh, I know. It took me quite a while to get T3 running on my machine and I am happy with it. I was just hoping to get ALL of the bugs worked out of my machine (e.g. realtime lsm) but was getting that weird error... Sorry about the long lines on that last email by the way. I now am back to T3 with CONFIG_SECURITY_CAPABILITIES=y insetad of m like realtime-lsm wants, and it works. Was my error a realtime-lsm meets x64 problem? T3 and CONFIG_SECURITY_CAPABILITIES=m problem? Some combination? THanks for the help again! -thewade
