From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:53:38 -0700 From: Tom Mitchell To: SELinux Subject: Re: Now that SELinux supports booleans should we replace tunables with booleans? Message-ID: <20040413175338.GA713@xtl1.xtl.tenegg.com> References: <407BF24E.90901@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <407BF24E.90901@redhat.com> Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 09:59:42AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > Ideas? The fewer decisions the kernel needs to make the better. i.e. The more decisions and analysis that can be make in advance of loading policy the better. -- T o m M i t c h e l l /dev/null the ultimate in secure storage. -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.