On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Joshua Brindle <method@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Karl MacMillan wrote: >> >> Accidentally sent this straight to Josh. >> >> Karl >> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Karl MacMillan<karlwmacmillan@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> I meant this - I don't want to pass around a boolean flag when we have >>> a flag for rule type. This allows cleanly adding support for, say, >>> generating both allow rules and auditallow rules at the same time. > > -ENOATTACH > >>> >>> Karl >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Joshua Brindle<method@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Daniel J Walsh wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 03/01/2010 03:45 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 03/01/2010 02:29 PM, Karl MacMillan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd rather pass in the rule type to the AVRule init rather than a >>>>>>> boolean about this being a dontaudit rule. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Daniel J Walsh<dwalsh@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> How about this patch. Moves the dontaudit up the chain a little bit. >>>>>> Is this what you want. >>>>> >>>>> One minor problem. Updated patch. >>>>> >>>> Karl? >>>> >> >
Attachment:
0001-Add-support-for-dontaudit-in-audit2allow.patch
Description: Binary data
