On mer., 2012-02-01 at 10:34 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:24:40AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > On mar., 2012-01-31 at 11:01 -0500, micah anderson wrote: > > > What is stopping you from creating another package, that provides the > > > kernel with grsecurity patches applied? Don't bother the kernel team > > > with it, and just maintain it yourself in the archive? Its free software > > > afterall. > > > > > > > Honestly, having multiple linux source package in the archive doesn't > > really sound like a good idea. I don't really think the kernel team > > would appreciate, I'm pretty sure ftpmasters would disagree, and as a > > member of the security team, It's definitely something I would object. > > Well, that's what we have the 'linux-source' packages for: to allow > other packages to build-depend on them. > Hmhm, that might be a good idea indeed. I need to investigate and try that a bit. Ben, what would kernel team think of that? Regards, -- Yves-Alexis
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part