On Sunday 20 July 2008 06:50, david@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Anaconda is a RH installation program, RH should know their own program and > the changes are quite trivial Might it be better to leave the Anaconda and dpkg policy in the distribution trees? It doesn't seem to provide much benefit to non Red Hat users to have Anaconda policy. Does Red Hat actually do anything useful with the Anaconda policy? Last time I checked the installation was run in permissive mode (there doesn't really seem to be a benefit in enforcing mode) so it's not as if anaconda.te is needed to permit the install to operation. Even so there is unconfined_t which could be used for an enforcing-mode install (last time I checked it was not possible to directly install a Red Hat distribution with strict policy). -- russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Blog http://www.coker.com.au/sponsorship.html Sponsoring Free Software development -- 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.
