From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:45:32 +0100 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton To: Ivan Gyurdiev Cc: Joshua Brindle , Stephen Smalley , SELinux List Subject: Re: [ SEPOL ] Move more things to newer debug system Message-ID: <20050916134532.GA9092@lkcl.net> References: <432799F0.7060706@cornell.edu> <1126702811.12299.29.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <432823F0.3030803@tresys.com> <1126705868.12299.71.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <43283772.7070603@tresys.com> <1126710276.12299.85.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <432842D4.3070905@tresys.com> <1126712325.12299.95.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <43284A6B.8080507@tresys.com> <43287BDC.1090004@cornell.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <43287BDC.1090004@cornell.edu> Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 03:37:00PM -0400, Ivan Gyurdiev wrote: > > >So, do you mean taking write_error, optionally passing in a string and > >size, having it write to the string if it's present and then calling > >the debug function pointer if it is present? That way we'll get the > >error in the handle so that the caller can deal with it and the debug > >function would also be called. Then the caller could choose to use > >debug by setting the pointer and other apps that need an error in the > >handle could use that? > > > >This seems reasonable to me.. Ivan? can i make a suggestion, namely that an old-looking api be written in terms of the "new" api? l. -- 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.