On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:24:42PM -0700, Thomas Fricaccia wrote: > > As Sarbanes-Oxley and > > other regulatory laws require these customers to use "standard > > kernels", the result is a rather dreary form of vendor lock-in, where the > > security framework is coupled to the distribution. > > Wait, what? > > Since when does Sarbanes-Oxley decree that a company must use a > "standard kernel"? And just exactly what defines such "standard > kernel"? Can you point out where in that bill it requires such a thing?
Simple, these days Sarbanes-Oxley is the default argument behind anything being pushed down your throat in a company. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/