11:56 a.m.
I've switched from BitKeeper to git and made the tree available from
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/audit-2.6/
Andrew, please could you pull this into the -mm tree from now on instead
of the BK version?
--
dwmw2
11:58 a.m.
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 17:56 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
I've switched from BitKeeper to git and made the tree available
from
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/audit-2.6/
Great news. Thanks.
-tim
12:05 p.m.
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 11:58 -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 17:56 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> I've switched from BitKeeper to git and made the tree available from
> rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/audit-2.6/
>
Great news. Thanks.
I'm actually coming to the conclusion that we should just ignore the
alleged freeze for -rc and ask Linus to pull what we have -- most of
it's been in -mm for a while anyway.
For that reason I haven't yet included the patch which audits signals
sent to auditd (which is still under discussion anyway) or the auditfs
patch.
--
dwmw2
12:22 p.m.
* David Woodhouse (dwmw2(a)infradead.org) wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 11:58 -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 17:56 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > I've switched from BitKeeper to git and made the tree available from
> > rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/audit-2.6/
> >
>
> Great news. Thanks.
I'm actually coming to the conclusion that we should just ignore the
alleged freeze for -rc and ask Linus to pull what we have -- most of
it's been in -mm for a while anyway.
Good, I had same conclusion (esp. for the straight bug fixes). BTW,
your set is a bit different from mine (and some are already upstream).
thanks,
-chris
12:29 p.m.
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 10:22 -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
Good, I had same conclusion (esp. for the straight bug fixes). BTW,
your set is a bit different from mine (and some are already upstream).
I dropped a couple of patches which were already in Linus' git tree --
what else am I missing that I should have pulled in? I haven't been
tracking the mailing list too well for the last couple of weeks while
I've been in .au.
--
dwmw2
12:49 p.m.
* David Woodhouse (dwmw2(a)infradead.org) wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 10:22 -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> Good, I had same conclusion (esp. for the straight bug fixes). BTW,
> your set is a bit different from mine (and some are already upstream).
I dropped a couple of patches which were already in Linus' git tree --
what else am I missing that I should have pulled in? I haven't been
tracking the mailing list too well for the last couple of weeks while
I've been in .au.
Ugh! If I could get cg-diff to do something useful... ;-)
I think I was off though. I'll let you know once I figure it out.
thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
12:55 p.m.
* Steve Grubb (sgrubb(a)redhat.com) wrote:
On Friday 29 April 2005 13:22, Chris Wright wrote:
> Good, I had same conclusion (esp. for the straight bug fixes).
What did we decide about the printk issue? Are we going to improve the current
patch to clamp at byte 1023 so we don't leak memory?
That's one of the bits I'm looking at in David's tree.
thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
3:53 p.m.
* Chris Wright (chrisw(a)osdl.org) wrote:
* Steve Grubb (sgrubb(a)redhat.com) wrote:
> On Friday 29 April 2005 13:22, Chris Wright wrote:
> > Good, I had same conclusion (esp. for the straight bug fixes).
>
> What did we decide about the printk issue? Are we going to improve the current
> patch to clamp at byte 1023 so we don't leak memory?
That's one of the bits I'm looking at in David's tree.
Actually looks fine, there is always one free byte in the skb payload
(I missed that earlier). When moving the audit buffer to the skb,
the check for extra room will leave a trailing byte (from the <= check):
if (!skb || skb_tailroom(skb) <= ab->len + extra)
thanks,
-chris
12:28 p.m.
On Friday 29 April 2005 13:05, David Woodhouse wrote:
For that reason I haven't yet included the patch which audits
signals
sent to auditd (which is still under discussion anyway)
I'll send one last patch that hooks SIGHUP & changes the struct & message
name. Other than that, I think its ready to go.
-Steve
12:15 p.m.
* David Woodhouse (dwmw2(a)infradead.org) wrote:
I've switched from BitKeeper to git and made the tree available
from
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/audit-2.6/
ITYM either
/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dwmw2/audit-2.6/
or
/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dwmw2/audit-2.6.git/
?
thanks,
-chris
4:25 p.m.
David Woodhouse <dwmw2(a)infradead.org> wrote:
I've switched from BitKeeper to git and made the tree available from
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/audit-2.6/
Andrew, please could you pull this into the -mm tree from now on instead
of the BK version?
no probs.
7175
days inactive
7176
days old
linux-audit@lists.linux-audit.osci.io
12 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Andrew Morton -
Chris Wright -
David Woodhouse -
Steve Grubb -
Timothy R. Chavez