From: Jörgen Sigvardsson <jorgen.sigvardsson@kau.se>
Subject: UML-stuff
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:23:58 +0100
Next Article (by Date): Re: UML-stuff Amon Ott
Previous Article (by Date): Re: First successful bootup Jörgen Sigvardsson
Next in Thread: Re: UML-stuff Amon Ott
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I think I have now established uml (0.38) and rsbac (1.1.0) can coexist in a nice manner. I have now booted rsbac+uml with procfs, devfs, non-maint.kernel using MAC, ACL and REG without any major hiccups (it still complains a little about /proc and /dev - rsbac_get_attr() can't lookup device)(using slackware dist). BTW, are there any "test suites" out there? Amon, since I am going to actively use uml for my own work (until it is finished), I would be happy to maintain the patches, unless you have something else in mind. I have basically two options for maintaining the patches: 1) a patch which is applied against an already patched UML-kernel 2) a patch which is applied against an already patched RSBAC-kernel Do you have any preferences regarding this? I did it by using the 2) option, but I guess 1) is equally as nice. I guess it's just a matter of semantics. What sounds better: * An RSBAC-enabled UML-kernel - or - * A UML-enabled RSBAC-kernel Ideas? - -- Jörgen Sigvardsson, B. Sc. Lecturer, Computer Science Dept. Karlstad University Tel: +46-(0)54-700 1786 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6jBCvJtcD8rikkmwRAsGkAKCTdSB0BEbBTCvksziFNu4BUdAHWwCgmNKK Rm9VNJ7Odb06HR9VKu7gmHI= =nOtS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - To unsubscribe from the rsbac list, send a mail to majordomo@rsbac.org with unsubscribe rsbac as single line in the body.
Next Article (by Date): Re: UML-stuff Amon Ott
Previous Article (by Date): Re: First successful bootup Jörgen Sigvardsson
Next in Thread: Re: UML-stuff Amon Ott
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]