Subject: Re: verified executable kernel modification committed
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
From: Bang Jun-Young <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/31/2002 04:19:03
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.
What about ld_vexec or ld_veriexec?
Bang Jun-Young <email@example.com>