On Tuesday 16 January 2007 00:13, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: >On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 22:58 -0600, Steven P. Ulrick wrote: >> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:57:37 -0500 >> >> Lyvim Xaphir <knightmerc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 13:47 +1030, Tim wrote: >> > > Ralf Corsepius: >> > > >>> One thing I can tell for sure: There is still a noticeable >> > > >>> group of Linux users in Europe, for whom this incident and the >> > > >>> NSA's involvement into SELinux is an argument for "not >> > > >>> choosing" Fedora. >> > > >> > > Claude Jones >> > > >> > > >> I'm not surprised, and I have heard that myself - in fact, that >> > > >> comes up quite frequently in other forums and lists - I just >> > > >> haven't seen much discussion of it here... >> > > >> > > Anne Wilson: >> > > > That reads as though Fedora is the only one employing SELinux. >> > > > I'm sure that's not so, and I've definitely seen it proposed in >> > > > magazines as the way forward that will become a de facto >> > > > standard. >> > > >> > > Taking the opposite line of attack, it is possible to completely >> > > remove it from a Linux installation, isn't it? >> > >> > Good question. I'd like to find out about that myself. >> >> Hello, Everyone >> I don't know if this is a full answer to the above question, but I >> thought that I'd try running "yum remove *selinux*" just for fun. See >> the result at: http://www.afolkey2.net/Projects/selinux.txt >> >> For the impatient, the file referred to above says that I would need >> to >> >> remove 979 RPM's: >> > Transaction Summary >> > ==================================================================== >> >========= Install 0 Package(s) >> > Update 0 Package(s) >> > Remove 979 Package(s) >> >> Here is the output of rpm -qa on my system: >> http://www.afolkey2.net/Projects/rpm.txt >> >> It shows that 1,617 RPM's are installed on my system. So, if I would >> remove all *selinux* packages, I would have 638 RPM's left. >> Unfortunately, I would have no kernel: >> kernel i686 2.6.18-1.2868.fc6 installed >> 44 M kernel i686 2.6.18-1.2869.fc6 installed >> 44 M kernel i586 2.6.18-1.2849.fc6 >> installed 43 M kernel-devel i686 >> 2.6.18-1.2868.fc6 installed 14 M kernel-devel >> i586 2.6.18-1.2798.fc6 installed 14 M kernel-devel >> i686 2.6.18-1.2869.fc6 installed 14 M >> kernel-devel i586 2.6.18-1.2849.fc6 installed >> 14 M >> >> I am not an expert. I only submit this for the experts to interpret. >> >> Steven P. Ulrick >> >> -- >> 22:58:26 up 42 days, 5:06, 0 users, load average: 0.18, 0.41, 0.44 > >Wow. That just pegged my absurd-o-meter. > >This is a little *too* difficult. Now I'm wondering about rpm --force >--nodeps. Think I'll give that a try. > > >LX I believe you will have to build a generic kernel.org kernel, configured without that support, something I have underway right now, using 2.6.20-rc4. I was amazed at the number of options I found turned on that a proper 'make oldconfig' should absolutely never have turned on. My scripts take care of everything but grub.conf for a kernel install, so when its done all I should have to do is reboot since I'm already running 2.6.20-rc4. Several things I found may even account for the apparent slowness of later kernels. Things like 15 seconds to launch firefox on an xp-2800 athlon with a gig of ram? -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2007 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
