Re: [apparmor] [PATCH 05/10] From 030feaef9487e90fcd8ce3c1d7e97bf85ef1b320 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Johansen Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 04:51:19 -0700 Subject: [PA

2013-07-24 Thread Seth Arnold
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:32:48PM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > Remove use of AARE_DFA as the alternate pcre matching engine was removed > years ago. > > Signed-off-by: John Johansen Acked-by: Seth Arnold Wow, keep these cleanups coming :) Thanks > --- > parser/parser.h | 4 ---

Re: [apparmor] [PATCH 04/10] From 34e17974b97355313e84feb74e92e5e3a91ef5e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Johansen Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 04:50:11 -0700 Subject: [PA

2013-07-24 Thread Seth Arnold
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:32:47PM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > Refactor policydb entry processing so that post_process_policydb_ents is > just a driver for rule specific routines. > > Signed-off-by: John Johansen Acked-by: Seth Arnold Thanks > --- > parser/parser_regex.c | 13 +++--

Re: [apparmor] [PATCH 03/10] From a3f0ccf618c2016ce5fbaa0fe35d4f194fbefd2b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Johansen Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 04:49:23 -0700 Subject: [PA

2013-07-24 Thread Seth Arnold
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:32:46PM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > let allow be used as a prefix in place of deny. Allow is the default > and is implicit so it is not needed but some user keep tripping over > it, and it makes the language more symmetric > >eg. > /foo rw, > allow /fo

Re: [apparmor] [PATCH 02/10] From 071e0ba1669cf330c22fb5bcb9de2a1db0d12a84 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Johansen Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 04:48:52 -0700 Subject: [PA

2013-07-24 Thread Seth Arnold
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:32:45PM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > Signed-off-by: John Johansen Wow, another awesome looking cleanup. Some comments inline. > --- > parser/parser.h | 6 ++ > parser/parser_yacc.y | 191 > +-- > 2 files change

Re: [apparmor] Where should the new aa-exec live in packaging

2013-07-24 Thread John Johansen
On 07/24/2013 02:35 PM, Steve Beattie wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:26:43AM -0700, John Johansen wrote: >> So we have a binary (C based) version of aa-exec that just needs a little >> more revision before we land it. One of the things we need to decide is >> which package to put it in. >> >>

Re: [apparmor] Where should the new aa-exec live in packaging

2013-07-24 Thread Steve Beattie
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:26:43AM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > So we have a binary (C based) version of aa-exec that just needs a little > more revision before we land it. One of the things we need to decide is > which package to put it in. > > We could modify the utils packaging to handle binar

Re: [apparmor] Where should the new aa-exec live in packaging

2013-07-24 Thread John Johansen
On 07/24/2013 11:02 AM, Jamie Strandboge wrote: > On 07/24/2013 11:26 AM, John Johansen wrote: >> So we have a binary (C based) version of aa-exec that just needs a little >> more revision before we land it. One of the things we need to decide is >> which package to put it in. >> >> We could modify

Re: [apparmor] [parser patch] fix apparmor cache tempfile location to use passed arg

2013-07-24 Thread John Johansen
On 07/23/2013 10:43 AM, Tyler Hicks wrote: > One minor nitpick/question... > > On 2013-07-23 08:36:12, Steve Beattie wrote: >> Subject: [parser patch] fix apparmor cache tempfile location to use passed >> arg >> >> This patch fixes problems in the handling of both the final cache >> name location

Re: [apparmor] Where should the new aa-exec live in packaging

2013-07-24 Thread Seth Arnold
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:26:43AM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > So we have a binary (C based) version of aa-exec that just needs a little > more revision before we land it. One of the things we need to decide is > which package to put it in. > > We could modify the utils packaging to handle binar

Re: [apparmor] Where should the new aa-exec live in packaging

2013-07-24 Thread Jamie Strandboge
On 07/24/2013 11:26 AM, John Johansen wrote: > So we have a binary (C based) version of aa-exec that just needs a little > more revision before we land it. One of the things we need to decide is > which package to put it in. > > We could modify the utils packaging to handle binary and no arch, cre

[apparmor] Where should the new aa-exec live in packaging

2013-07-24 Thread John Johansen
So we have a binary (C based) version of aa-exec that just needs a little more revision before we land it. One of the things we need to decide is which package to put it in. We could modify the utils packaging to handle binary and no arch, create a new package for binary utils, or just move it int

Re: [apparmor] change_profile permission denied

2013-07-24 Thread Jeroen Ooms
Apologies, this was due to a typo in the profile name (ocpu_exec vs ocpu-exec). But perhaps the error could have been more informative (profile does not exists vs permission denied). On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote: > I can't get the change_profile directive to work. I have two

[apparmor] change_profile permission denied

2013-07-24 Thread Jeroen Ooms
I can't get the change_profile directive to work. I have two profiles loaded, called ocpu-main and ocpu-exec. The ocpu_main profile should allow to transition into the more restrictive ocpu-exec: #include profile ocpu-main { #include #include change_profile -> ocpu-exec, } In addition, t

Re: [apparmor] [PATCH 01/10] clean up the lexer

2013-07-24 Thread Seth Arnold
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:32:44PM -0700, John Johansen wrote: > - Make indenting consistent > - Move common match + fn patterns into a single shared entry with mulitstate > headers > - add names table to convert lexer state #s to state names used in the code > - Create/use macros for common patt