Re: Penalty of SELinux?
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:28:13 -0500, Mike McCarty
<Mike.McCarty@sbcglobal.net> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> As I said, it might be a good starting place. If the patching of the
> source is done right, it's dependent upon a define anyway. I don't
> have high hopes for that.
All the patches I have submitted for inclusion in Debian have
been conditional -- as is the case in patches accepted upstream that I
am aware of
> "Unpatching" is not difficult, as there are
> diff tools which can do that automatically if one has the original
> source. Providing that back to Gentoo, along with a polite request,
> might get access to original source.
> If, as you say, the changes are "small", then pulling the unmodified
> sources for those things which are changed for SELinux should not be
> difficult. Since one is going to build from source anyway, then the
> rest is a shoe in.
> I'm not so sure the changes are "small".
> If Gentoo is not amenable, then there's SLAX, which I believe does not
> have SELinux.
Well, best of luck in searching for a distribution that meets
your goals.
manoj
--
He'll sit here and he'll say, "Do this! Do that!" And nothing will
happen. Harry S. Truman, on presidential power
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: