On 10/25/2014 9:45 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Would you consider patches that address this as part of the Multiple >> LSM work? I wouldn't be doing the security server integration as that >> would be outside the scope of the effort, but I consider the namespace >> issue to be in scope. I won't bother if you aren't open to it. > No, sadly I think a rename patch would need to be part of a larger > cleanup/integration effort; otherwise it just looks like a lot of > churn for minimal benefit. I understand that is probably looks > significant within the work you are doing to stack LSMs, but > considering how rare/unique that work is, I don't think this is > problem many people are likely to run into on a regular basis. OK, I shan't worry about it. I suspect that I'm the only person on the planet likely to be bothered especially much by it, and I do have enough other kittens to fry. _______________________________________________ Selinux mailing list Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
