[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] OpenBSD Networking-related randomization port

To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OpenBSD Networking-related randomization port
From: Lorenzo Hernández García-Hierro <lorenzo@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:23:38 +0100
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Hank Leininger <hlein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20050131165025.GN18316@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <1106932637.3778.92.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050128100229.5c0e4ea1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1106937110.3864.5.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050128105217.1dc5ef42@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1106944492.3864.30.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1106945266.7776.41.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200501290915.j0T9FkVY012948@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050131165025.GN18316@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
El lun, 31-01-2005 a las 17:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk escribió:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 04:15:43AM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:47:45 +0100, Arjan van de Ven said:
> > 
> > > as for obsd_get_random_long().. would it be possible to use the
> > > get_random_int() function from the patches I posted the other day? They
> > > use the existing random.c infrastructure instead of making a copy...
> > > 
> > > I still don't understand why you need a obsd_rand.c and can't use the
> > > normal random.c
> > 
> > Note that obsd_rand.c started off life as a BSD-licensed file - I was told
> > that was a show-stopper when I submitted basically the same patch a while 
> > back.
> >...
> At least the three clause BSD license is GPL compatible.

Yes, AFAIK :)

I will try to follow Arjan's recommendations on using his functions
instead of obsd ones, even if I think it should be alone in the current
Also I will split up the patch.

I will do it as soon as I get time for it, I need first to work out a
cleaner vsec (no more code in headers and such) and also a sys_chroot()
hook that I requested yesterday on the bugzilla, among the SELinux 2.4
backport which needs several fixes due to last 2.6 bk-commits reports.

Thanks for the comments,
Lorenzo Hernández García-Hierro <lorenzo@xxxxxxx> 
[1024D/6F2B2DEC] & [2048g/9AE91A22][]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>