On Monday, 13 July 2026 03:19:25 AEST Simon McVittie wrote: > Without detailed knowledge of SELinux, I'd be inclined to agree with > Luca's assertion that creating this directory isn't/shouldn't be the > shared library's job: the shared library gets installed on every Debian > system and into every Debian container (it's transitively Essential), > but most Debian systems don't actively use SELinux. As a result, I think > moving the tmpfiles.d snippet from libselinux1 to selinux-utils was a > good thing to do. > > However, I'm not so sure that adding the Recommends as part of that > change is desirable. Luca's reasoning for why it was OK to move the > creation of /run/setrans from libselinux1 to selinux-utils, because > practical systems with SELinux will have these utilities anyway, seems > like it would be equally valid even without that Recommends?
The package selinux-utils is depended on by selinux-policy-default, so it will be dragged in by every functional SE Linux system and shouldn't need anything else. When SE Linux is disabled there shouldn't be a case where mcstrans is looked up. Thw case of "security=selinux" on the kernel command line with no policy installed is not suppprted. I suggest removing that depends. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
