Re: audit.50 kernel

On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 10:50 -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote: > Well... you're building RPMs with the hash table stuff... so did you want to branch? > Because I need to be able to test and fix bugs so that I can submit to LKML. Maybe > I'm not following ya. You want one implementation (the hash table) for Redhat-only > kernels and a separate (i_audit) implementation for mainline? Well the theory was the hash table stuff wouldn't really affect the testing much. So having it as an addon only in the RPM would be at least feasible. In fact I think it might be useful to use the hash table in the mainline version too, and allocate each inode's audit data only on demand -- we're currently allocating it for _every_ inode at the moment when in fact it's rarely going to be used. But I was going to make that suggestion in 'diff -up' form instead of just waffling about it ;)