-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/29/2011 07:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 29.04.11 16:34, Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
Yes, I think this would be a good thing to
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 18:44:13 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
On Sat,
Apr 30, 2011 at 02:54, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 29.04.11
17:46, Greg KH (g...@kroah.com [1]) wrote:
I think /srv
actually makes a lot of sense. Probably not so much on the
desktop, but the boundaries are blurry, and
On Mon, 02.05.11 12:09, David Quigley (seli...@davequigley.com) wrote:
Merging the kernel patch without doing the
legwork for userspace first is a very bad idea. The kernel is what
mounts the FS under /selinux so if you have it mount under
/sys/fs/selinux instead without coordinating with the
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 19:29 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mon, 02.05.11 12:09, David Quigley (seli...@davequigley.com) wrote:
Merging the kernel patch without doing the
legwork for userspace first is a very bad idea. The kernel is what
mounts the FS under /selinux so if you have it
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:54, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
On Fri, 29.04.11 17:46, Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
I think /srv actually makes a lot of sense. Probably not so much on the
desktop, but the boundaries are blurry, and I see no reason to set
things up
W dniu 29 kwietnia 2011 04:09 użytkownik Jasper Boot
jasper.b...@gmail.com napisał:
Hi,
2011/4/29 Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com
Hi,
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
existance? For seven years FHS requires that this directory exists
On 29/04/11 00:37, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
existance? For seven years FHS requires that this directory exists
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 00:37 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
I guess I missed some discussion of this. You'd need to update
libselinux at least, definition of SELINUXMNT in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/29/2011 11:07 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 00:37 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
I guess I missed some discussion of
2011/4/29 seth vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org:
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 23:32 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:37:26AM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
existance? For seven years FHS requires that this
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 17:26 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2011/4/29 seth vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org:
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 23:32 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:37:26AM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the
On Fri, 29.04.11 00:37, Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
Yes, I think this would be a good thing to have in F16.
Note however that this needs a tiny kernel patch to work, to create
On Fri, 29.04.11 17:26, Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) wrote:
2011/4/29 seth vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org:
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 23:32 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:37:26AM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
By the way, maybe it would be good to think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/29/2011 06:56 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 29.04.11 00:37, Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
Yes, I think this would be
On Fri, 29.04.11 11:21, Daniel J Walsh (dwa...@redhat.com) wrote:
I guess I missed some discussion of this. You'd need to update
libselinux at least, definition of SELINUXMNT in
libselinux/src/policy.h, used by selinux_init_load_policy() to mount
selinuxfs for initial policy load. And
On Fri, 29.04.11 11:07, Stephen Smalley (s...@tycho.nsa.gov) wrote:
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 00:37 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
I guess I missed some discussion of this. You'd need to
2011/4/30 Daniel J Walsh dwa...@redhat.com:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/29/2011 06:56 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 29.04.11 00:37, Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is
On Fri, 29.04.11 16:34, Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
Yes, I think this would be a good thing to have in F16.
Note however that this needs a tiny kernel patch to work, to create the
On Fri, 29.04.11 17:46, Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
I think /srv actually makes a lot of sense. Probably not so much on the
desktop, but the boundaries are blurry, and I see no reason to set
things up differently in this respect between servers and desktops. I
see little benefit
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir
is directly under /.
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
existance? For seven years FHS requires that this directory exists
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE16A
but The
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:37:26AM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
existance? For seven years FHS requires that this directory exists
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE16A
but The methodology used to name
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 23:32 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:37:26AM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
existance? For seven years FHS requires that this directory exists
22 matches
Mail list logo
