"Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
> >
> > In that case, my argument changes to:
> > "There's no good reason not to have bpf in the GENERIC kernel."
>
> And how about having
> if (securelevel > 3)
> return (EPERM);
> in bpf_open()?
I like this. Nice one, Greenie! ;^)
Now stop replying to yourself, it's too much like...
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
http://softweyr.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabl... Warner Losh
- Re: So, back on the topic of e... Sergey Babkin
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabl... Bernd Walter
- Re: So, back on the topic of e... Ben Rosengart
- Re: So, back on the topic of e... Bernd Walter
- Re: So, back on the topic of e... Bill Fumerola
- Re: So, back on the topic of e... Warner Losh
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabl... Christopher Masto
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabl... Warner Losh
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabl... Warner Losh
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling b... Wes Peters
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GE... Warner Losh
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GENERIC... Nate Williams
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GENERIC... Daniel C. Sobral
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GENERIC... Wes Peters
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GENERIC... Peter Jeremy
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GENERIC... Mark Murray
- Re: So, back on the topic of enabling bpf in GENERI... Jordan K. Hubbard

