On Thursday 08 April 2010 12:01:54 pm Eric Paris wrote: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Paul Moore <paul.moore@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday 05 April 2010 03:01:24 pm Paul Moore wrote: > >> Correct a problem where we weren't setting the peer label correctly on > >> connected UNIX domain sockets and do some other general fixup while we > >> are messing with the code. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <paul.moore@xxxxxx> > > > > Does anyone object to this patch going in? > > > > I know Stephen had a comment about some of the changes regarding the > > inode and sock security structs, but I haven't heard anything since my > > response to him so I'm going to assume he's okay with the changes (speak > > up if your not). Okay, thanks; I thought that was fixed, guess not. There is a joke about SELinux and networking here I'm sure, but I'm not going to make it ;) > It's going to conflict with the patch James committed last night from > me to rename all of the "ssec" in the code to sksec. I'm pretty sure > James can handle that conflict, but just so we know it is there..... Yeah, your patch is what jogged my memory on this. As you say, the merge should be trivial, but I can do a quick re-spin if needed; I just didn't want to spend the time if there is a complaint against the patch and I need to re- work it. -- paul moore linux @ hp -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
