On 2015-01-22 21:17:40, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 2015-01-22 10:16:59, John Johansen wrote: > > On 12/05/2014 04:22 PM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > > > This patch creates a private API in libapparmor in which upstream > > > provides no guarantees in regards to ABI stability. > > > > > > A new header file, <sys/apparmor_private.h>, is created. The "_aa" > > > prefix will be used for symbols belonging to the private API. > > > > > > To kick things off, a library friendly version of is_blacklisted() is > > > moved into libapparmor. > > > > > > The purpose of a private libapparmor API is to prevent duplicated code > > > between the parser and libapparmor. This becomes an issue as we prepare > > > to move chunks of the parser into libapparmor. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tyler Hicks <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: John Johansen <[email protected]> > > Thanks again! > > > > > though I agree with Christian that we are going to want a public version > > of the is_blacklisted() api. But that can come in another patch > > I do this in the second patch set where I move everything into > libapparmor. It is exported as a "private" function named > _aa_is_blacklisted(). See the "libapparmor: Create a private API" patch > in the second patch set, if interested.
Uhh... I confused myself. You're reviewing the "libapparmor: Create a private API" patch here. Christian wasn't asking for a public version that we commit to ABI compatibility. He was simply saying that he's glad that he can reuse this function in the tools. I think we're fine to leave it as an exported-but-private function since the only programs that will be using it are in our tree. Tyler
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
