From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4631F19C.2090508@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:50:36 -0400 From: Daniel J Walsh MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Karl MacMillan CC: Stephen Smalley , SE Linux Subject: Re: policycoreutils patch References: <4630C59F.1070106@redhat.com> <1177615134.3405.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1177615134.3405.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov Karl MacMillan wrote: > On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 11:30 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > >> This patch moves audit2why to /usr/bin to match audit2allow, since both >> can be used from userspace. Also moves sepolgen-ifget to /usr/sbin, >> since this is not to be run by normal users. >> >> > > sepolgen-ifgen can be run by a normal user and the output saved to an > arbitrary file. audit2allow also has flags for reading the interface > information from a non-default flag. So I think it should stay > in /usr/bin. > > I merged the audit2why change to trunk, stable, and policyrep. > > Karl > > > I guess the argument would be just because it can be run by a normal user, should it be placed in /usr/bin? I look at apps that are almost never run by normal users and tend to put them in /usr/sbin. But overall I don't really care. The only problem is that I have selinux-policy-devel package executes it in /usr/sbin. So moving it back to /usr/bin would be a hassle. -- 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.