On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 16:34 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I don't exactly know where to post this, but I guess I have everyone's > attention on this thread. > > Attached are patches which work for me. They could really do with > review from someone who knows what they're doing. They also need much > more testing than I've done, but I'll be doing that myself later. > > The first patch (against libselinux) sets SELinux to Permissive mode > early in boot if the /.autorelabel file is found (or autorelabel on > the command line). > > The second patch (against policycoreutils in Fedora) implements the > generator itself. Do we actually *need* the second patch if we have the first? I mean, my suggestion was just to do the first patch; if we do that, do we actually need to worry about making the relabel happen any earlier than it currently does? but yeah, patch #1 looks like what I wanted, so +1 for that. Note that https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1351358 is my bug suggesting exactly that, so any update which implements patch #1 can be marked as fixing that bug. thanks for this! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
