Le jeudi 09 juin 2005 à 17:43 +1200, Nigel Jones a écrit :
Did you know that all Debian kernels now have SELinux compiled in?
Yeah, thankfully, I build my own kernels...
It seems that for many people, building your own kernel is still
considered as a proof of virility. Great.
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 10:44:30PM +1200, Nigel Jones wrote:
It's been implied that people will be basicly *forced* to use selinux,
wrong. completely wrong.
in the debian kernel builds (as arranged i believe by
manoj), the default option for the selinux kernel module is
selinux=0.
that
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 23:08:08 +1200, Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 08/06/05, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Nigel Jones]
if coreutils is made absolutely dependant on libselinux1, then
the user gets no choice...
One think is depending on the library, another is
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:56:17PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
last time i spoke to him [name forgotten] the maintainer
of coreutils would not accept the coreutils patches -
already completed and demonstrated as working and
It's been implied that people will be basicly *forced* to use selinux,
so couldn't it be easier to have a coreutils-selinux package on the
side? just like how the kernel team maintain a couple different
branches of the kernel at the same time. There are people that
*REFUSE* to use selinux
[Nigel Jones]
if coreutils is made absolutely dependant on libselinux1, then the
user gets no choice...
One think is depending on the library, another is actually using
selinux. Your objection to use selinux might have some merit, but
your objection to have a package depend on libselinux1 does
On 08/06/05, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Nigel Jones]
if coreutils is made absolutely dependant on libselinux1, then the
user gets no choice...
One think is depending on the library, another is actually using
selinux. Your objection to use selinux might have some merit,
* Nigel Jones
| Hmmm, I can see your point, BUT, if a user is not going to use selinux
| at all, then what is the use of downloading extra dependencies that
| you don't need. I thought that a feature of APT was that it makes you
| only download the libraries that you need/use.
Yes, and
On Wed, June 8, 2005 12:50, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
In RedHat, using selinux is a run time option. If one don't want to use
it,
all one need to do is update a config file and reboot. I'm sure can get
something similar working in Debian.
If it's not necessary for basic operation of the
* Thijs Kinkhorst ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, June 8, 2005 12:50, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
In RedHat, using selinux is a run time option. If one don't want to use
it,
all one need to do is update a config file and reboot. I'm sure can get
something similar working in Debian.
of having debian/selinux is totally dependent on
this one thing happening.
no libselinux1=Required, no debian/selinux [all dependent
packages e.g. coreutils will be policy violations].
Uhhh, it's the other way around. Get coreutils to Depend on
libselinux1 and it'll be brought up to Required
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:44:30 +1200, Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It's been implied that people will be basicly *forced* to use
selinux,
Where on earth did you get that idea? The goal is to make it
_feasible_ for people to run SELinux on Etch by configuring boot
so couldn't
On 09/06/05, Manoj Srivastava va, manoj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:44:30 +1200, Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It's been implied that people will be basicly *forced* to use
selinux,
Where on earth did you get that idea? The goal is to make it
_feasible_
* Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050607 02:01]:
any progress on making libselinux1 a Required package?
the possibility of having debian/selinux is totally dependent
on this one thing happening.
no libselinux1=Required, no debian/selinux [all dependent packages
e.g
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 08:24:31PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
any progress on making libselinux1 a Required package?
the possibility of having debian/selinux is totally dependent
on this one thing happening.
no libselinux1
* Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
last time i spoke to him [name forgotten] the maintainer
of coreutils would not accept the coreutils patches -
already completed and demonstrated as working and sitting on
http://selinux.lemuria.org/newselinux - because libselinux1
hi,
any progress on making libselinux1 a Required package?
the possibility of having debian/selinux is totally dependent
on this one thing happening.
no libselinux1=Required, no debian/selinux [all dependent packages
e.g. coreutils will be policy violations].
l.
--
--
a href=http://lkcl.net
* Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
any progress on making libselinux1 a Required package?
the possibility of having debian/selinux is totally dependent
on this one thing happening.
no libselinux1=Required, no debian/selinux [all dependent packages
e.g. coreutils
18 matches
Mail list logo
