From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mummy.ncsc.mil (mummy.ncsc.mil [144.51.88.129]) by tycho.ncsc.mil (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i52BI9rT003350 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2004 07:18:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.enyo.de (jazzhorn.ncsc.mil [144.51.5.9]) by mummy.ncsc.mil (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i52JCdbn014440 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2004 15:12:40 -0400 (EDT) To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Cc: SE-Linux Subject: Re: Debian / SE/Linux - libselinux1 needs to be set priority "important" or "required" References: <20040530092059.GP2851@lkcl.net> From: Florian Weimer Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 13:06:18 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20040530092059.GP2851@lkcl.net> (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton's message of "Sun, 30 May 2004 09:20:59 +0000") Message-ID: <874qpy18et.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov * Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton: > a number of SE/Linux-based upstream patches to packages (coreutils, > logrotate, sysvinit), are being held up because libselinux1 is at > present incorrectly set to priority "optional". Isn't full SELinux integration a bit risky in the light of Secure Computing's patents? How do other distributors deal with this issue? Do they ignore it entirely? -- Current mail filters: many dial-up/DSL/cable modem hosts, and the following domains: bigpond.com, di-ve.com, fuorissimo.com, hotmail.com, jumpy.it, libero.it, netscape.net, postino.it, simplesnet.pt, spymac.com, tiscali.co.uk, tiscali.cz, tiscali.it, voila.fr, yahoo.com. -- 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.