From Fedora Project Wiki
(Questions related to the draft) |
(? Recommend: foo-selinux) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
* what if one package aims foo-selinux wants to generate foo-selinux-targeted and foo-selinux-mls? (e.g. see copr-selinux) | * what if one package aims foo-selinux wants to generate foo-selinux-targeted and foo-selinux-mls? (e.g. see copr-selinux) | ||
* shouldn't the install macros be called in posttrans? | * shouldn't the install macros be called in posttrans? | ||
* should packages Recommend/Require the 'foo-selinux' packages? (consider selinux is enforcing, and people install foo-bar package, but forgot to install foo-selinux) | |||
== policy to sync with global selinux policy? == | == policy to sync with global selinux policy? == | ||
Revision as of 11:14, 30 August 2018
general questions
- can the reasons for %defattr 755 be explained?
- what if one package aims foo-selinux wants to generate foo-selinux-targeted and foo-selinux-mls? (e.g. see copr-selinux)
- shouldn't the install macros be called in posttrans?
- should packages Recommend/Require the 'foo-selinux' packages? (consider selinux is enforcing, and people install foo-bar package, but forgot to install foo-selinux)
policy to sync with global selinux policy?
- do we have to maintain all the
.fcpaths, also related to e.g. debian (as is done in selinux-policy-targeted) - if something changes in say mysql-selinux, do we have to backport it to selinux-policy-targeted upstream?
- should we maintain paths for SCLs? Or should each SCL have it's own '*-selinux' package with custom paths?
- should there be e.g. separated policy for mariadb vs. mysql?