On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 16:34 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I don't exactly know where to post this, but I guess I have everyone's
> attention on this thread.
> 
> Attached are patches which work for me.  They could really do with
> review from someone who knows what they're doing.  They also need much
> more testing than I've done, but I'll be doing that myself later.
> 
> The first patch (against libselinux) sets SELinux to Permissive mode
> early in boot if the /.autorelabel file is found (or autorelabel on
> the command line).
> 
> The second patch (against policycoreutils in Fedora) implements the
> generator itself.

Do we actually *need* the second patch if we have the first? I mean, my
suggestion was just to do the first patch; if we do that, do we
actually need to worry about making the relabel happen any earlier than
it currently does?

but yeah, patch #1 looks like what I wanted, so +1 for that. Note that 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1351358 is my bug
suggesting exactly that, so any update which implements patch #1 can be
marked as fixing that bug. thanks for this!
-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to