On 09/27/2012 02:32 AM, intrigeri wrote: > Hi, > > John Johansen wrote (27 Sep 2012 09:05:20 GMT) : >> On 09/27/2012 12:08 AM, intrigeri wrote: > >>> I beg to disagree. IIRC nobody asked them to include that patch. >>> As far as I'm concerned, I focused on getting the core functionality >>> in for Wheezy. >>> >> Sorry I did not mean to imply that you didn't do what you were asked >> to do, merely provide some facts in an abbreviated form. We are >> actually quite happy with the work you did, and the feedback we >> received. I hope this extended explanation clears things up. > > Thank you for clarifying. This is very much appreciated. > > For the record, I do not maintain the Linux kernel in Debian: I was > merely the one who asked the actual maintainers to apply the minimum > patchset so that we get mostly-working AppArmor in Wheezy. And, just Ah yes sorry, I should have gone back and check the names etc on the original thread. I remembered you from it, just mis-remembered your roll.
> like you, at the end of this discussion, I decided not to ask the > Debian Linux kernel maintainers to apply more out-of-tree > AppArmor patches. > > So eventually, I beg to agree :) > -- AppArmor mailing list AppArmor@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
