On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Yaro Kasear <yaro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2011 05:43:51 Kaiting Chen wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Jelle van der Waa <jelle@xxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > And on a side note, I don't like archlinux forcing users to use SELinux > > > because users should have a choice to use any MAC software they want. > > > That's why AppArmor /Tomoyo are nicer solutions cause they don't > require > > > recompiling of packages -> increasing bugs/problems. > > > > If we compile our packages with SELinux support, does that force users to > > use SELinux? I was under the impression that these changes would be > > completely benign on non-SELinux enabled systems. --Kaiting. > > No, SELinux-patched tools do not force one to use SELinux. But they can > potentially have plenty of bugs introduced by the patches. And there's the > fact that SELinux is not necessary and there's not point in putting it in > the > default Arch install just for the minority who'll actually use it. At most, > it > should be in [core]. At the very least, [community]. I definitely see no > good > reason to make it part of the base install, though. > Yaro makes many good points, I think that my recommendation would be to allow someone to maintain support for SELinux in community. If SELinux support is deemed something that would be a good idea to move to core in the future than do so, otherwise leave it in community.
