linux-kernel - Re: Btrfs v0.14 Released

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 2 May 2008 08:38:12 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Cc:	jeffschroeder@...puter.org, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>,
	Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...ts.ubuntu.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	John Johansen <jjohansen@...e.de>
Subject: Re: Btrfs v0.14 Released

On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 10:34:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Thanks, but this uses CONFIG_SECURITY_APPARMOR which isn't enough to tell if 
> the kernel has the patch.  Lets go back to Jeff's suse patch:

Do we really need to support kernels compiled with the apparmour patch
applied but not enabled?  That would be a custom kernel build, and I get
the impression that people Just Don't Do That -- if they want a newer
kernel, they fetch one from kernel.org.  Maybe I'm wrong though.

-- 
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/