Hi Jeff, Jeff Mahoney: > We just finished merging 2.6.27-rc3 into our CVS repository and there > were a number of changes that affected how AppArmor interacts with the > rest of the kernel. I'd like to discuss them here to determine if the > delegation thread which was originally added to work with AppArmor is > needed anymore.
Although I don't know much about Suse, I think aufs dlgt option and the threads are still necessary. The behaviour of new security_inode_permission() may not be a problem and may be suitable as you wrote. But aufs has to support other security operations such as security_inode_create() or security_file_permission() still. If you want to drop the aufs/patch/sec_perm.patch, I guess you can. Of course, for AppArmor only. Junjiro R. Okajima ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
