Subject: Re: verified executable kernel modification committed
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Luke Mewburn <email@example.com>
Date: 10/30/2002 12:24:04
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:17:11PM -0500, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
| On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:41:08AM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
| > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:05:25AM +1100, Luke Mewburn wrote:
| > >
| > > At a minimum, the control program (and associated examples) should be
| > > "veriexecctl" or something like that (instead of "verifiedexec_load").
| > > As for the kernel option name, that's probably OK.
| > >
| > Sure, sounds good to me. I thought that verifiedexec_load was a bit
| > of a mouthful.
| I don't find "veriexecctl" much better, frankly. It's still hugely long
| and will force ls output into a smaller number of columns, which is
| annoying. Please pick a more Unixy name.
Changing the `ls' output for /sbin (or /usr/sbin) ... ?
I think not; there are already many programs in those directories with
names longer than 11 characters. c.f
/sbin/dhclient-script /sbin/mount_cd9660 /sbin/mount_ext2fs
/sbin/mount_filecore /sbin/mount_kernfs /sbin/mount_overlay