Quoting James Morris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > It's already pretty clear. > > > > I doubt anyone not on lkml or linux-security-module has heard of this. > > > > So we'll see. > > > > (I was, obviously, talking about end-users) > > If distributions are shipping binary modules and other out of tree code to > their users, then they should bear responsibility for supporting and > maintaining the infrastructure required for it, and not expect upstream > maintainers to do it for them. > > Additionally, if they want to expose their users to risks arising from > broken and unecessary infrastructure, then they should bear the cost and > responsibility of doing that and not expect others to do so as well. > > I don't see how this is even slightly difficult to understand.
I'm not talking about distros - I don't see how this is even slightly difficult to understand :) The situation I have in mind is someone who decideds to use, say, SLIM, but wants to otherwise use the distro kernel. James, relax, I'm done arguing against your patch, I just think end-users/customers might complain. -serge - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
