Re: why not install selinux with systemd being used

[Harald Hoyer <harald-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 05/28/2013 04:18 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> On 05/27/2013 07:40 PM, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>> On 05/22/2013 12:14 PM, Dave Young wrote:
>>> On 05/22/2013 06:13 PM, Dave Young wrote:
>>>> Hi, Harald
>>>>
>>>> I have a question about selinux module.
>>>>
>>>> In dracut.spec there's below code:
>>>>
>>>> %if %{defined _unitdir}
>>>> # with systemd IMA and selinux modules do not make sense
>>>> rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{dracutlibdir}/modules.d/96securityfs
>>>> rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{dracutlibdir}/modules.d/97masterkey
>>>> rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{dracutlibdir}/modules.d/98integrity
>>>> rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{dracutlibdir}/modules.d/98selinux
>>>> %endif
>>>>
>>>> I'm confused why they are excluded for systemd?
>>>>
>>>> And how can we load selinux policy in initramfs without 98selinux now?
>>
>> Do you have to load the selinux policy in the initramfs?
>> systemd does it after switching to the real root.
>>
> 
> After crashing happens, under kdump kernel we need copy vmcore to
> filesystem with right selinux attributes. But we are also discussing if
> it's better to relabel them after machine restart..

What do you do, if the rootfs is broken?

Relabeling seems to be a better solution, IMHO.
In theory the relabeling service can also be triggered, when the partition
containing the crash is mounted.

I agree, that there is a problem, if the crash partition is mounted only readonly.

I will put selinux back in the fedora packages, if you really need it.