On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 13:31:42 -0400, > Tom H <tomh0665@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 08:19:46 -0400, >>> Tom H <tomh0665@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> Why do have both "enforcing=0" and "selinux=0"? >>> >>> Because they are different. enforcing=0 will run selinux in permissive >>> mode, selinux=0 will disable selinux. >> >> Exactly. Doesn't disabling selinux for that particular boot not >> override setting selinux to run in permissive mode? It doesn't make >> sense to use both simultaneously. > > If you use selinux=0 it doesn't matter what enforcing is set to. So you > could change things so that there was one flag with three states instead > to two flags with 2 states each. I have no opinion on whether the selinux developers should have two variables with two states or change to one with three, as long as their/its use is clearly documented. The only reason that I pointed out that setting these two selinux variables simultaneously (and two other things that I've now forgotten) didn't make sense is that the OP reported that his "kernel..." line was deemed too long by dracut/anaconda. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
