2.6.5-1.349 ignores selinux=0
James Morris
jmorris at redhat.com
Tue May 4 19:21:42 UTC 2004
On Tue, 4 May 2004, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> What we used selinux= and enforcing= was for overriding the config
> file if you screw it up. If there's another way around this, sure.
Good point, I would also like to use selinux= for development/support
(e.g. to ensure SELinux has not been loaded at all).
Arjan, any objection to re-enabling this?
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris at redhat.com>
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list