Re: secmark integration

["Christopher J. PeBenito" <cpebenito@tresys.com>]

On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 13:59 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 14:02 -0400, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 13:47 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 13:40 -0400, Karl MacMillan wrote:
> > > > That sounds fine to me (assuming I understand), but I thought people
> > > > were concerned about the number of booleans.
> > > 
> > > We just need a per-domain subtree of booleans under /selinux/booleans ;)
> > > /selinux/booleans/httpd_t/enable_cgi 
> > > 
> > > Speaking of which, we do want to try to go with a one file per value
> > > approach in selinuxfs, so on the dynamic class/perm discovery work,
> > > let's try to provide a nice directory tree form of it.
> > 
> > Ok, that means I get to start over. :)  I was doing some final debugging
> > on a single /selinux/class node that uses a simple transaction
> > like /selinux/access.
> > 
> > Just to be certain, you're asking for
> > 
> > /selinux/class/[classname]/index
> > /selinux/class/[classname]/[permname]
> > 
> > where each of those just return the values?
> 
> Yes, doesn't that sound nicer?

Its fine with me, though it was just mentioned to me that we'll have
problems if there is a future perm named index.  Suggestions on what to
call that node?

-- 
Chris PeBenito
Tresys Technology, LLC
(410) 290-1411 x150


--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.