Hello, Am Freitag, 3. April 2015 schrieb Steve Beattie: > The actual fix in > utils/apparmor/aa.py is fine for 2.9, but we (I?) haven't decided on > pulling the AATest stuff to 2.9, so it wouldn't be acceptable in > isolation unless some reworking occurred.
You probably noticed that I proposed the whole patch series for trunk and 2.9, and I still think this would be a good idea ;-) I don't see a risk in applying test changes in 2.9 (even if this means pulling in AATest, which you could call a bigger change). Worst thing that can happen is a test failure, and that's something we'll notice easily ;-) The series has some non-test patches that are bigger than AATest and are needed to fix real bugs - and backporting only the "core bugfix" without the cleanup, added tests etc. is much more work and IMHO also more risky than applying all patches. Besides that: most of the changed code is covered by (freshly added) tests, to I'm quite sure the risk of breaking something is quite low (even if v1 of "logparser.py: change mask only for path events" just showed that this risk still exists ;-) TL;DR: IMHO we should apply all utils/** patches from the last weeks to 2.9, which basically means the only difference between trunk and 2.9 would be the CapabilityRule class. Regards, Christian Boltz -- Wo steht der Server eigentlich? Kann den die Putzfrau treten? Oder mal mit dem Staubsauger überfahren? Denen fallen ab und an Gemeinheiten ein auf die ein Normalsterblicher nie kommen würde. :\ [Daniel Lord in suse-linux] -- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
