From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <437A050E.70703@tresys.com> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:55:58 -0500 From: Joshua Brindle MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivan Gyurdiev CC: Stephen Smalley , Daniel J Walsh , SELinux-dev@tresys.com, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: [ SEMANAGE ] Stub pserver backend References: <437907D7.8090002@cornell.edu> <1132054159.5415.282.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <1132055891.5415.305.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <437A04A5.10000@cornell.edu> In-Reply-To: <437A04A5.10000@cornell.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov Ivan Gyurdiev wrote: >> >>> I'd prefer to wait until we have a basic working implementation and a >>> user ready for merging. Posting stubs or function prototypes to the >>> list as examples is fine, but I don't see much value in merging them. >>> It was ok for early development of libsemanage in order to build up >>> infrastructure and allow early collaboration/feedback, but I'd prefer to >>> move to merging actual implementations now. I'd especially like to see >>> sample users (even just dummy test programs) that allow the code to be >>> trivially exercised along with the submissions to help put it in >>> context. >>> > > Ok, in that case disregard the last two patches - I will resend those > with implementation. > >> >> Also, I think we need to think about priorities of tasks; policy server >> backend and runtime boolean manipulation via libsemanage seem fairly low >> to me right now. Of greater importance would be: >> > > Sure, but stubs are easy to write - just wanted to point to where the > functionality should go into. > The rest of the things you specified are important, but a bit harder to > do... not disregarding the issues. > >> - Finishing the ports functionality and exporting those interfaces, >> > > I think this is of particularly high importance to Dan - I'll have to > work on that soon. Are you going to do this in python? If so we'll need to wrap all the port types and also implement the write/transaction functionality, all that has been done so far is querying of seusers, users, modules. Have you looked at the swig wrappers? Do you feel comfortable wrapping additional types? > >> - Creating utilities for managing the other policy components via >> libsemanage. >> > > What would all those utilities look like - shell? python with GUI? > should I be working on those - Dan? > > -- 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.