On Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:33:42 PM vi0oss wrote: > >> "the code below exists solely to deal with the varadic nature > >> > >> of seccomp_rule_add()" > > > > I'm not sure why this part of the description was put in quotes. Am I > > missing something? > > Because of it is a citation from seccomp.pyx, to illustrate the previous > clause.
I probably should have recognized that :) > > A few things ... > > > > * Where are the manpages and tests? ... > > (other recommendations) > > * Create a new helper function _seccomp_rule_add_va() > > ... > > Does all that make sense? > > Yes, it does; I was implementing all that mostly for a demo, without > caring much... No problem; patches, no matter how rough, are almost always welcome here. > Going to re-implement the second patch in a better way according to the > points above. I see them in my inbox, thank you. If I don't get to them today I will review them tomorrow. Thanks for sticking with this, I appreciate it. -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013 and get the hardware for free! Learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb _______________________________________________ libseccomp-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libseccomp-discuss
