Steve Grubb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Its not poor practice to make something usable for people.
...
> For the moment, we are going the route of doing this via `id -Z`. But I
> thought there was a common problem across secure distributions that we could
> create a standard for. TSOL could link
> I don't understand the problem specification.
>
> I tried duplicating the problem in 4 different terms:
> SecureCRT->a linux box, then in three cygwin variations:
> the Win-cmd style "terminal", rxvt (non-X version), and
> rxvt (X-version). They all appeared to look the same.
>
> What is meant
On Saturday 06 May 2006 19:23, Linda Walsh wrote:
> IMO, common core utilities shouldn't be linking with specialized
> libraries.
We already have many common core utilities linking with security libraries.
This is how you make life easier for the end user.
> Alternatively, maybe there should be
IMO, common core utilities shouldn't be linking with specialized
libraries.
However, if SELinux has been adopted by "Gnu.org" as the standard
security mechanism, and SELinux is part of the Linux-Standard-Base
then it might not be unreasonable to include support for it.
Is SELinux part of the Lin
I don't understand the problem specification.
I tried duplicating the problem in 4 different terms:
SecureCRT->a linux box, then in three cygwin variations:
the Win-cmd style "terminal", rxvt (non-X version), and
rxvt (X-version). They all appeared to look the same.
What is meant by typing "ls
