Heya,
It has been a year today when I posted the original systemd announcement
blog story. Time for a birthday release:
http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/systemd-26.tar.bz2
Mostly bugfixes.
Only bigger thing to mention is that tmpfiles/binfmt/sysctl/modules-load
now also look for con
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
In the interest of keeping userspace from having to create new root
filesystems all the time, let's follow the lead of the other in-kernel
filesystems and provide a proper mount point for it in sysfs.
For selinuxfs, this mount point should be in /sys/fs/selinux/
Cc: St
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 littl
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 07:07:17PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> -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
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 cre
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:56:26AM +0200, 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 a good thing
2011/4/30 Daniel J Walsh :
> -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 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 n
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.
-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 th
On Fri, 29.04.11 17:26, Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> 2011/4/29 seth vidal :
> > 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
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 creat
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
libselinux/src/polic
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 17:26 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2011/4/29 seth vidal :
> > 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
> >>
2011/4/29 seth vidal :
> 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
-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 discussi
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:41:37 +0200 Michał Piotrowski
wrote:
> W dniu 29 kwietnia 2011 04:09 użytkownik Jasper Boot
> napisał:
> > Hi,
> > 2011/4/29 Michał Piotrowski
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv
> >> existance? For seven years FHS
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
> > http://www.pathname.com/
18 matches
Mail list logo
