On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 15:32 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 22 January 2007 13:06, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > [...] > > >Sounds more like ccache sped up your build than anything selinux > >related. > > Except that ccache has been in use since back about a week after I > installed FC6 from scratch, installed then as a solution to the long > build times of the kino cvs. It was in use on FC2 before that, for about > a year. (But that copy or /root/.ccache is on another separate drive.) > So it was active for the 2nd and 3rd builds too, in addition to building > all the 2.6.19-rcN tree as it became available. And all of those builds > were 30 minutes or more. With ccache running... > > I guess it boils down to you can believe what you want, and I can do the > same. When I get a 3x increase in *effective* compiler speed by dropping > selinux, then I think the conclusions I reach as a lifetime > troubleshooter & medium grade JOAT should be obvious. I'm sorry it > doesn't appear that way to others. ---- one problem I have with this is that you say that you've been using ccache for a year on FC-2 when in fact, last November 30th, you didn't know what ccache was and Dave Jones had to tell you what it was and how to install it. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-November/msg06826.html This of course is notwithstanding the problems you had making it work because you insist on building stuff as root and that isn't secure or recommended... https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-November/msg06858.html ---- > > Selinux is also on my FC5 lappy, but it didn't seem to 'get in my face' > near as badly as this FC6 version has done. Here, when its set for > permissive, and it generates 100k a day in the logs for my normal > activities, reading and replying to email, looking at manpages, working > on bash scripts, playing a few rounds of patience or editing a wedding > video in kino and harrassing the folks on ./ as well as these lists, it > just strikes me that something IS drasticly wrong, and I'm trying to fix > it. I didn't build an XP2800 box with a gig of ram on a 333mhz fsb 3 > years ago to have it run like a dosbox using floppies. I'll build > another, a 64 bitter with maybe 4GB of ram next time, when linux has 64 > bit supported as well as 32 bit is now. In the meantime I don't intend > to support bloat if I can do away with it. > > As someone said in a private email, this is MY checkbook, this is MY house > (its paid for too), this is MY truck (and I wrote a check for it) and > this is MY computer. And that seems like a right attitude to me. ---- SELinux sort of separates the sysadmins from the users. Users don't want anything to get in their way (i.e., make/build, run GUI as root). Sysadmins don't want anything to compromise their system. Craig
