On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Greg KH <g...@kroah.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:14:40AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> I would prefer /sys/security for all LSMs, but if SELinux goes with /sys/fs >> Smack will likely follow on the theory that mirroring the current dominant >> LSM is more likely to please the masses than doing what the greatest number >> of LSMs are doing. > > Is smack going to create its own filesystem like selinux has, or is it > going to use securityfs? If securityfs, then stick with what you have. > If you are going to create a new one, I'd be glad to work with you to > add anything you might need to securityfs first, but if that doesn't > work out, then yes, you could use /sys/fs/ for your new one.
Pretty sure we already have a securty/smack/smackfs.c ..... -Eric _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
