On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Yaro Kasear <yaro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2011 14:29:34 Heiko Baums wrote: > > Am Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:55:16 -0600 > > > > schrieb Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > 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. > > > > I'd prefer a separate [selinux] repo. So that people know what they are > > doing. > > > > I know, packages with SELinux support could and should be named > > something like selinux-XXX or XXX-selinux, but I think a new repo would > > be better and more secure - not only from SELinux' view. > > > > This way SELinux users can just add [selinux] to pacman.conf above > > [core]. For the other users it should be deactivated by default. > > > > Heiko > > Here's another question. Isn't it general packaging policy to not fully > support packages that have unofficial upstream patches applied? Isn't > SELinux "unofficial" to all the upstream? > SELinux has been in the vanilla kernel for quite some time, say the 2.6.20 ish realm, and the majority of the core utils have had SELinux support built in for years. SELinux is official upstream. But I don't want to argue about this anymore :) I think that we have a solution, I will be putting up an SELinux third party repo for testing in the next month or two and then once we have an assurance that it is working well we look into moving SELinux support into community. This has been a great discussion, and I am excited to get some work done on improving SELinux support on Arch! -Thomas S Hatch
