PERFORCE change 92056 for review

[D1ng0]

> FYI, all the other TrustedBSD branches use 'trustedbsd_' as a prefix of their 
> branch name:
> 
> trustedbsd_acl
> trustedbsd_acl_nfsv4
> trustedbsd_audit
> trustedbsd_audit2
> trustedbsd_audit3
> trustedbsd_audit3_old
> trustedbsd_audit3_openbsm_sys
> trustedbsd_cap
> trustedbsd_doc
> trustedbsd_dsep
> trustedbsd_mac
> trustedbsd_objlabel
> trustedbsd_openbsm_audit3
> trustedbsd_sebsd
> trustedbsd_sedarwin
> 
> If you were following that pattern you would use 'trustedbsd_sebsd2' rather 
> than just 'sebsd2'.  Also, all the other TrustedBSD branches are branched 
> from the 'trustedbsd' base branch in //depot/projects/trustedbsd/base/...  
> For example, the audit3 branch's view is:
> 
> View:
>         //depot/projects/trustedbsd/base/... //depot/projects/trustedbsd/audit3/...
> 
> Wherease the sebsd2 branch's view is:
> 
> View:
>         //depot/vendor/freebsd/src/... //depot/projects/trustedbsd/sebsd2/...
> 
> Is the inconsistency intentional?
> 

the trustedbsd_ branch name was an over sight, the branching
from //depot/vendor/freebsd/src/... instead
of //depot/projects/trustedbsd/base/...  was due to a conversation
pertaining to pulling in audit to sebsd2 while working to bring it
current, referring to the specific email would be 

                           Subject: 
Re: Migrating SeBSD to CUREENT - Are
we alive ???
                              Date: 
Thu, 16 Feb 2006 13:45:11 +0000
(GMT)  (21:45 PHT)

where Robert stated it would be best to branch from vendor/freebsd or
even trustedbsd/mac to include the audit code, though mac is in an
untested state.  So i went with vendor/src/... now as for the branch
name, how can we resolv that.