Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 21:14:00 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: mikej@rogers.com, trustedbsd-audit@TrustedBSD.org, gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu, current@FreeBSD.org, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Audit integration into CVS in progress, some tree disruption Message-ID: <20060201211400.09e9fdb8.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060202011453.Y87763@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060201221213.L87763@fledge.watson.org> <43E134AB.8000600@t-hosting.hu> <20060201222704.G87763@fledge.watson.org> <43E14C53.3060400@rogers.com> <20060202004044.GA99245@xor.obsecurity.org> <43E1586E.6090203@rogers.com> <20060202011453.Y87763@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 01:17:47 +0000 (GMT) Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Mike Jakubik wrote: > > > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 07:03:31PM -0500, Mike Jakubik wrote: > >> > >>> Personally, i would like to see less "experimental" code in 6.1. Perhaps > >>> it would be better to wait until everyone feels the code is ready? > >> > >> Why do you care if code that is not enabled by default is present in the > >> system? :-) > > > > Well... While you, me, and other viewers of this list may be fully aware of > > the situation, some else who is either new to FreeBSD or missed out on this > > info may try it and possibly be disappointed. Which would ruin their > > experience and/or opinion of FreeBSD in general. I guess if it does make it > > in, it would be a good idea to clearly notify the user that it is still > > experimental, etc.. > > In the past, we've marked features as experimental using a man page note, > e.g., in the mac(4) man page: > > NAME > mac -- Mandatory Access Control > > SYNOPSIS > options MAC > > ... > > BUGS > See mac(9) concerning appropriateness for production use. The TrustedBSD > MAC Framework is considered experimental in FreeBSD. > > And as such in the release notes. However, maybe we could add the following > also: > > - Dependence on defining "options EXPERIMENTAL" in the kernel configuration > file -- if the kernel isn't compiled with the EXPERIMENTAL option, a compile > error warning that it needs to be defined will be generated. > > - When a kernel is configured with an experimental feature, config generates a > warning, similar to the ones it currently generates about GPL'd components, > etc. > > And we should make sure there is a note in the handbook section as well. There is, IIRC. I'll double check to make sure. -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060201211400.09e9fdb8.trhodes>