From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <434BD7DE.3080206@cornell.edu> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:18:54 -0400 From: Ivan Gyurdiev MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Smalley CC: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, Daniel J Walsh , Karl MacMillan Subject: Re: [ SEMANAGE ] Replace semanage debugging system References: <434B62B8.4080309@cornell.edu> <1129037671.3308.84.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <1129039592.3308.110.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <434BCC58.7030509@cornell.edu> <1129041009.3308.125.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <434BD2CB.8050007@cornell.edu> <1129042012.3308.139.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> In-Reply-To: <1129042012.3308.139.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov > Why not just use the handle directly, and drop the separate message > structure entirely? > It's disorganized... the handle contains all kinds of things - I don't like adding random fields to it. It'd be more orderly to add a structure, and functions to work with it, in a separate file. I would think that nested structs have no runtime overhead... -- 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.