On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 08:27:47AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 09:29 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:02:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
> > > - SELinux is currently the only use
Quoting Adrian Bunk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
> - SELinux is currently the only user of filesystem security labels
> shipped with the Linux kernel
> - if a user has SELinux enabled he wants his filesystems to support
> security labels
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 09:29 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:02:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
> > - SELinux is currently the only user of filesystem security labels
> > shipped with the Linux kernel
> > -
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 05:02:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
> - SELinux is currently the only user of filesystem security labels
> shipped with the Linux kernel
> - if a user has SELinux enabled he wants his filesystems to support
Please correct me if any of the following assumptions is wrong:
- SELinux is currently the only user of filesystem security labels
shipped with the Linux kernel
- if a user has SELinux enabled he wants his filesystems to support
security labels
Based on these assumption, it doesn't make sense
