Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 02:33 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Adam Williamson wrote: just to note the facts: this issue could have been resolved much faster, and SELinux is not the reason why it wasn't. But SELinux is the reason the bug was there in the first place. Without SELinux, we wouldn't have had this bug! (Systems without SELinux were not affected, because the broken workaround was only used on systems where allocating the JIT memory normally doesn't work.) Nor the two (separate) critical regressions that plagued F20 and Rawhide recently. Kevin Kofler PS: Et ceterum censeo SELinux esse delendum. There are thousands of KDE bugs I do not experience because I do not have KDE installed, according to your logic then we should eliminate KDE so those bugs will not bother anyone else either. Please stop the childish molestation of this list, you know it's useless, SELinux is not going to be removed or disabled by default. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
Adam Williamson wrote: just to note the facts: this issue could have been resolved much faster, and SELinux is not the reason why it wasn't. But SELinux is the reason the bug was there in the first place. Without SELinux, we wouldn't have had this bug! (Systems without SELinux were not affected, because the broken workaround was only used on systems where allocating the JIT memory normally doesn't work.) Nor the two (separate) critical regressions that plagued F20 and Rawhide recently. Kevin Kofler PS: Et ceterum censeo SELinux esse delendum. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.atwrote: How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? Kevin Kofler I'm sure you are entitled to your opinion, and it is quite easy to disable if that's what you want. However, I quite like SELinux and have had very little trouble with it. Needless to say, I disagree with you. dave -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Hi, GHC (Haskell) was broken for (at least) over a year because of a bug in the workaround for stupid SELinux restrictions: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7629 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907515 How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? It does not matter how often you repeat that ... its not a horribly flawed idea. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Yet another bug caused by SELinux
Hi, GHC (Haskell) was broken for (at least) over a year because of a bug in the workaround for stupid SELinux restrictions: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7629 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907515 How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? Kevin Kofler PS: Et ceterum censeo SELinux esse delendum. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
2014-03-20 12:22 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at: Hi, GHC (Haskell) was broken for (at least) over a year because of a bug in the workaround for stupid SELinux restrictions: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7629 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907515 How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? Kevin Kofler PS: Et ceterum censeo SELinux esse delendum. Hi, according to the RHBZ ticket, there was a fix but it was not timely applied to the package. Rather than SELinux, I'd say that the fault lies with the crazy updates policy that plague us. regards, H. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 12:35 +0100, H. Guémar wrote: 2014-03-20 12:22 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at: Hi, GHC (Haskell) was broken for (at least) over a year because of a bug in the workaround for stupid SELinux restrictions: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7629 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907515 How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? Kevin Kofler PS: Et ceterum censeo SELinux esse delendum. Hi, according to the RHBZ ticket, there was a fix but it was not timely applied to the package. Rather than SELinux, I'd say that the fault lies with the crazy updates policy that plague us. I don't know how you figure that. The update for F20 was submitted on 01-29 and pushed stable on 02-17. For F19 it was submitted 01-29 and pushed stable on 03-19. Both updates could have been pushed stable as early as 02-06: as ghc is not a critpath package, the update policy requires only a 7 day wait unless karma is posted. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux
On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 12:22 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Hi, GHC (Haskell) was broken for (at least) over a year because of a bug in the workaround for stupid SELinux restrictions: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7629 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907515 How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? Of course restrictions implemented for security reasons will cause issues. I don't know why you keep posting cases and acting as if this will be news to someone. They happen, we get them fixed, everyone's lives improve. On the timeline of this one: as I read the reports, it was reported to upstream on 2013-01-25. It was reported to Fedora on 2013-02-04. The reporter tracked down and fixed the issue upstream on 2013-03-26. So one month and 22 days after it was reported to Fedora, a patch was available and could have been backported. In fact the patch was only backported to Fedora 19 on 2014-01-29. The delay from 2013-03-26 to 2014-01-29 was the Fedora maintainer's. Not to throw stones - maintainers are all busy - just to note the facts: this issue could have been resolved much faster, and SELinux is not the reason why it wasn't. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
