Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 31 March 2008 20:02, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I like Michael's suggestion. Rephrasing it,
>>
>> if (SELinux, with no other MAC or ACL)
>> use '.'
>> else if (any other combination of alternate access methods)
>>
On Monday 31 March 2008 20:02, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like Michael's suggestion. Rephrasing it,
>
> if (SELinux, with no other MAC or ACL)
> use '.'
> else if (any other combination of alternate access methods)
> use '+'
>
> If someone who already has a cop
[ I'm Cc'ing [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI, this is a continuation of discussion from the SELinux list:
http://marc.info/?t=12064507403&r=1&w=2
and the debian bug tracking system: http://bugs.debian.org/472590
The problem is that on an SELinux-enabled system, 'ls -l's "+",
the "alternate acc
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:40:03PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 21:30, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Character 10 in "ls -l" output can have values from "xtT", character 7 can
>have values from "xsS", and character 1 can have many values.
Yes, and we've lea
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 04:12:15PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
How much can you fit into one char before it gets confusing?
Character 10 in "ls -l" output can have values from "xtT", character 7 can
have values from "xsS", and character 1 can have many values.
Yes, and we've learned that it'
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 21:30, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Character 10 in "ls -l" output can have values from "xtT", character 7 can
> >have values from "xsS", and character 1 can have many values.
>
> Yes, and we've learned that it's pretty confusing. It will be even more
Obvi
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 10:43, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 08:24:15AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> >Should there be some special marking of files with both a SE Linux context
> > and an ACL?
>
> (not cc'ing the closed selinux list again)
What is the probl
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 08:24:15AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
Should there be some special marking of files with both a SE Linux context and
an ACL?
(not cc'ing the closed selinux list again)
How much can you fit into one char before it gets confusing? As I
understand it, there can't be a ca
Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 March 2008 04:31, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> if (acl) then '+'
>> else if (selinux) then '.'
>
> Should there be some special marking of files with both a SE Linux context and
> an ACL?
>
> Pity that they didn't choose an
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 04:31, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> if (acl) then '+'
> else if (selinux) then '.'
Should there be some special marking of files with both a SE Linux context and
an ACL?
Pity that they didn't choose an "a" to mark an ACL which would then permit
using "A"
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 02:08, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Older versions of the POSIX spec for ls clearly require a "+" on
> any file with a SE Linux security context.
> But the latest allows it to be any non-space printable character.
> So eventually we'll make it more useful tha
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 04:08:36PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
Older versions of the POSIX spec for ls clearly require a "+" on
any file with a SE Linux security context.
But the latest allows it to be any non-space printable character.
So eventually we'll make it more useful than a one-size-fits-
Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> unstable0:~/coreutils-6.10# ls -l /
> total 158
> drwxr-xr-x+ 2 root root 4096 2008-03-25 10:02 bin
> drwxr-xr-x+ 6 root root 1024 2008-03-21 12:30 boot
> drwxr-xr-x+ 16 root root 3700 2008-03-25 13:38 dev
> drwxr-xr-x+ 80 root root 4096 2008-03-25 1
13 matches
Mail list logo
