-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/05/2010 10:18 PM, Mr Dash Four wrote: > >> In theory that would work since the policy is wrapped in a >> optional_policy block. >> > Ah, right - something new I learned today then! > >> To be honest these modules (authlogin and locallogin) should not be in >> base in the first place. >> >> I dont have them in base in my personal policy either: >> >> [root@localhost Desktop]$ semodule -l | grep authlogin >> authlogin 2.2.0 >> [root@localhost Desktop]$ semodule -l | grep locallogin >> locallogin 1.10.0 >> > Yeah, but other modules (gdm for one, I think) is also 'base' and if you > make locallogin as 'module' you will get that error too (I tried doing > something like this this afternoon and soon realised that I will be in a > world of hurt if I continue that path, so I prepared a separate module > instead). gdm should not be in base either: semodule -l | grep xserver xserver 3.4.2 I've been through this duplicate declaration/out of scope issues many times. It is one of the reason that i maintain my own policy instead of using fedoras' policy. > >> Stuffing everything in base just to work around some issue that should >> be handled more appropriately is a bad idea in my opinion. >> >> If this patch does not work then not much else will work and policy is >> fundamentally broken. >> > Hehe! I am sure you've tested it before sending this over. I'll do the > same tomorrow and see how it goes. > Sorry, i have not tested it. Yet, i am pretty sure it would work in my personal policy. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkz8As0ACgkQMlxVo39jgT/ZCgCfW75h55BiMEUcu30sqn0IoV9A pDAAoMFcoiGHjEDyiCWBYcLZT62H2uh0 =NnRc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- selinux mailing list selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
