[rsbac] Re: Thoughts on the "No Linux Security Modules framework" old claims

[Lorenzo Hernández García-Hierro]

El mié, 23-02-2005 a las 14:07 -0800, Crispin Cowan escribió:
> If that is what you meant, then we had no issue.
> 
> It looked like you were referring to Immunix because, in the quoted 
> text, one paragraph only discussed Immunix (by name) and then the 
> subsequent paragraph just said "them" and then talked about patents. 
> There was no mention of SCC.
> 
> So even if you meant SCC, the casual reader only saw "Immunix" followed 
> by "patents", and would infer the obvious.

Yes, my fault.
I hope this will let readers out of any possible confusion, again, sorry
for any inconveniences, wasn't my intention to create confusion around
Immunix.

At least from my side, I don't have fights nor bad relationships with
anybody from Immunix, but also I just know a very few people from there.

Cheers,
-- 
Lorenzo Hernández García-Hierro <lorenzo at gnu.org> 
[1024D/6F2B2DEC] & [2048g/9AE91A22][http://tuxedo-es.org]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada
	digitalmente
Url : http://www.rsbac.org/pipermail/rsbac/attachments/20050223/2e23861b/attachment-0001.bin