[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: SELinux removed from desktop cd spin?

Douglas McClendon wrote:
Andrew Farris wrote:
Oh I followed your intention, I just disagree with whether that parallel is a fair or even logical one to make about whether selinux is *in* the official spins as opposed to *forcing* people to enable it, which is the difference between effecting your choice or not.

No, please reread what I said.

It was never about the choice to force people to enable it.

It was about the decision to mandate that *every* official fedora spin had it enabled by default.

I contend that that there is room for enough official spins, such that >0 will have selinux not enabled by default.

The target of the rant was advocating that exactly 0 official fedora spins have selinux not enabled be default.

The OP you replied to (jonez) did not mention enabling selinux, only having it. This may be a minor semantic difference, but I see no reason why the distribution should produce official spins without selinux *available*... I agree there is plenty of room for a spin in which it is not enabled by default (but I would not agree the main desktop spin is one of them). As you've already mentioned if its that important for someone to build a custom spin with no selinux bits on it at all, thats not exactly hard for them to do. But is there honestly a need for Fedora to host and build it? IMO No.

Andrew Farris <lordmorgul gmail com> <ajfarris gmail com>
 gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]