26 Nov
2003
26 Nov
'03
noon
Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen <k.s.matheussen(a)notam02.no> writes:
I still like a module idea though. I dont see the
point of
patching the kernel with the security module interface, except for the
security. What I would like, though, is:
This idea makes sense. If there is a requirement for clean, on-going
support on 2.4, the advantages you mention are significant.
Right now, I anticipate all new multimedia distributions using 2.6 as
soon as it is officially released. To my mind that makes the whole
module discussion moot. The LSM approach is clearly the preferred
method of doing these things in the 2.6 world.
I don't see much chance of new distributions supporting these
interfaces under 2.4. The existing ones are already released. I
don't expect anyone to go back and re-release with a new
give_me_realtime_or_something() module, except Nando, of course. :-)
So, to me that means basically "roll your own" 2.4 kernel usage, for
which the simple kernel patch is sufficient.
But, maybe there's something I'm forgetting?
--
joq