Tetsuo Handa wrote: > CONFIG_SECURITY_PATH is the one that is mandatory for TOMOYO 2.x but breaks the > kABI. My apologies. I was misunderstanding. I was assuming that making changes in "struct security_operations" breaks the kABI. But it seems it does not. I've just rebuilt kernel-2.6.32-131.17.1.el6.i686.rpm with TOMOYO 1.x/2.x. rpmbuild with kabi checks enabled did not fail. The only difference in symvers-2.6.32-131.12.1.el6.i686.gz between stock CentOS's kernel and CentOS + TOMOYO 1.8 kernel was + 0x0b6d773e ccsecurity_ops vmlinux EXPORT_SYMBOL . The only difference in symvers-2.6.32-131.12.1.el6.i686.gz between stock CentOS's kernel and CentOS + TOMOYO 2.2 (CONFIG_SECURITY_PATH=y + CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO=y) kernel was + 0xfc4d6f3e security_path_mknod vmlinux EXPORT_SYMBOL . TOMOYO added one new symbol but didn't change existing symbols. Akemi Yagi wrote: > In this case, the cplus kernel can accommodate TOMOYO 1.x. Can you > think of any reason it cannot? Anything else to consider? Does the cplus kernel accept source code not within RHEL's kernel SRPM? I thought the cplus kenrel does not. If it doesn't, TOMOYO 2.2 is OK for now but will require build fix patch when RCU path walk patchset is backported. > On a not so important subject, is TOMOYO written as 友代, and AKARI as 明 ? 灯り ? TOMOYO is 知世 from Card Captor Sakura, AKARI is 灯里 from ARIA.