what's in the works

Mon Mar 28 20:34:40 UTC 2005

On Monday 28 March 2005 02:31 pm, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Monday 28 March 2005 14:50, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> >  We can only assume <path> is relevant for this
> > walk for the reasons I mentioned in my prior e-mail.
>
> I still don't see the problem why you can't dump the watches like the rules
> are done. If you have the strings, why can't you dump them back?

What good would dumping the watch information be if you don't know where the 
watch trully is in the filesystem?  Shouldn't that also be important?

>
> -Steve
>
> --
> Linux-audit mailing list
> Linux-audit at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit

-- 
-tim