From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Aug  9 22:29:00 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA05604
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 22:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA05592
          for <Hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 22:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.7.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id FAA26827; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 05:28:30 GMT
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 14:28:29 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
cc: jds@TracerTech.COM, Hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern_mib.c:int securelevel = -1;
In-Reply-To: <199608100454.OAA16556@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960810142136.26799A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Do we get a option to define in our kernel configs?

Please use INSECURE to be consistent with BSD/OS and NetBSD.  I'm for
names in code that are black and white.  The man pages can describe the
gray areas in the bugs or caveats section.

I hope that choosing A_LITTLE_BIT_SECURE for a name was just aussie humor. 

Regards,


Mike Hancock