[apparmor] [patch] SubDomain.pm: add support for mkdir, truncate, rename operations (LP: #623467)

[John Johansen]

On 08/25/2010 05:04 PM, Steve Beattie wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 01:19:31PM -0700, John Johansen wrote:
>> On 08/25/2010 09:23 AM, Jesse Michael wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 09:18:38AM -0700, John Johansen wrote:
>>>> The test cases look good but where is the update to subdomain.pm?
>>>
>>> That was actually smaller than a test case patch--
>>>
>>> --- a/utils/SubDomain.pm
>>> +++ b/utils/SubDomain.pm
>>> @@ -2798,7 +2798,11 @@ sub add_event_to_tree ($) {                                                      
>>>                       $e->{name},                                                                       
>>>                      "",                                                                                
>>>                     );                                                                                  
>>> -    } elsif ($e->{operation} eq "open") {                                                              
>>> +    } elsif ($e->{operation} eq "open" ||                                                              
>>> +             $e->{operation} eq "truncate" ||                                                          
>>> +             $e->{operation} eq "mkdir" ||                                                             
>>> +             $e->{operation} eq "rename_src" ||                                                        
>>> +             $e->{operation} eq "rename_dest") {                                                       
>>>          add_to_tree( $e->{pid},                                                                        
>>>                      $e->{parent},                                                                      
>>>                       "path",                                                                           
>>>
>>
>> ah, I went through the patch two or three times and missed it each time
> 
> Yes, sorry, I probably should have broken them out into separate
> patches, but you know how it is...
> 
> 
hehe, yeah I know all too well.  I actually don't think there is anything
wrong with this being a single patch, everything is logically related.
And its really not horrendously large nor do I see how splitting it up
more would have greatly improved its readability.

Count this a me just not looking close enough.