--- David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > That happens to me when interfaces are described in SELinux terms. I > > still don't care much for multiple contexts, and I don't have a good > > grasp of how you'll deal with Smack, or any LSM other than SELinux. > > Me neither. I understand SELinux somewhat, though it's got a lot of wibbly > bits, and WinNT's security system, but I have no experience of the other > stuff. > > > Just as Stephen mentions, I also don't see the generality that a change > > of this magnitude really ought to provide. > > Perhaps it should be a specific interface, solely for cachefiles's use then. That would help focus things, to be sure. I don't know if that focus will speed things up or slow them down, but I think that attempting to accomodate SELinux/NFS, with the state that effort is in, will only lead to tears. Casey Schaufler casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
