On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Nick Kralevich <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:14 AM, William Roberts < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm more OK with that approach. What about removing all in tree uses? >> >> >> If we can, sure. > > Not sure how you're going to solve the ueventd/watchdogd symlink problem - > I agree that relying on symlink labeling is error prone and something we > should avoid... > Can someone please give me an argument that shows that its error prone? How is launching ueventd and watchdog from symlink not-error prone but having an fc entry for it is? As an alternative thought I can get rid of the symlinks to the start ueventd and watchdogd and replace them with minimal C shims that call init with an argument for the mode of operation. Then we can label that executable. -- Respectfully, William C Roberts
_______________________________________________ Seandroid-list mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]. To get help, send an email containing "help" to [email protected].
