My apologies. The second one is also numbered 1, but has the
following distinct subject line:
[PATCH 1/3] Fix for IPsec leakage with SELinux enabled -
V.03: Fix xfrm code
I definitely deleted one of them, since I usually get N copies
of very single patch posting and two of them looked
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:42:13PM -0500, Venkat Yekkirala ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
This version takes into account David Miller's comments
regarding treatment of security layer errors in the case
of socket policies. Specifically, these errors will be
treated like how these kind of errors
From: Venkat Yekkirala [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:42:13 -0500
This version takes into account David Miller's comments
regarding treatment of security layer errors in the case
of socket policies. Specifically, these errors will be
treated like how these kind of errors are
This version takes into account David Miller's comments
regarding treatment of security layer errors in the case
of socket policies. Specifically, these errors will be
treated like how these kind of errors are treated for
the main/sub policies, which is to return a full lookup
failure.
This version takes into account David Miller's comments
regarding treatment of security layer errors in the case
of socket policies. Specifically, these errors will be
treated like how these kind of errors are treated for
the main/sub policies, which is to return a full lookup
From: Venkat Yekkirala [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 17:07:59 -0400
My apologies. The second one is also numbered 1, but has the
following distinct subject line:
[PATCH 1/3] Fix for IPsec leakage with SELinux enabled - V.03: Fix xfrm code
I definitely deleted one of them, since I
These patches look ok to me. I've tested them and applied them to the git
tree [1].
Stephen, please let me know if you see any problems.
--
James Morris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[1] Git - git://git.infradead.org/~jmorris/selinux-2.6.git
Web -
