Re: Upstream first policy

[James Morris]

On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kyle McMartin wrote:
>> 
>> I recommend you don't look at Ubuntu, we might have a lot of extra
>> crud[2] in the kernel if you do. :) (Actually, shockingly less than I
>> thought, just apparmor, aufs, ndiswrapper are the obvious ones.)
> 
> Ok, so ndiswrapper falls under the "yeah, no" heading.
> 
> But apparmor was supposed to be on the "yeah, we'll merge it" path, I 
> talked to somebody about it not _that_ long ago. Some of the security 
> people object, but they object for all the wrong reasons and I really do 
> think that since it's getting used, we really should merge it.

The AppArmor developer has been posting patches for review -- there's 
nothing stopping the code being merged except for the need to address 
purely technical issues raised by reviewers, which is ongoing.

See: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.lsm/10443

> Although there was _some_ noise about Ubuntu trying to move away from 
> it.. But that may have been more of the whole FUD thing from the people 
> who for some unfathomable reason think that inodes are more important 
> than pathnames.

Hey, thanks for another random unfounded personal attack, it's really 
appreciated.


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/