Re: [PATCH 07/12] AppArmor: userspace interfaces

[Andi Kleen]

Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 6:13 PM, John Johansen
> <john.johansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The current apparmorfs interface is compatible with previous versions
>> of AppArmor.  The plans are to deprecate it (hence the config option
>> APPARMOR_COMPAT_24) and replace it with a more sysfs style single
>> entry per file interface.
>
> We don't usually merge compatibility code to handle ABIs that were
> developed out-of-tree. Why should we treat AppArmor differently?

I would say that always depends on the deployed base of the old ABI.
If there's a lot of users who would get broken I think there's a
good case for merging compat code (I don't know if that is or
isn't the case here). 

A widely used distribution release with the old user land would
probably count.

-Andi
-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/