[CentOS] Re: selinux stuff - I just don't get -- [OT] The usual suspects

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 19:38 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> I'm not sure why you would interpret my expressing puzzlement as meaning
> that it's a bug up my nether regions. Do you take all statements to
> their extreme extension? In any event, when users use the stuff, report
> back their issues things get fixed, things improve, it's the pattern of
> open source. Of course are free to opt out by turning it off.
> I don't want to tell a client that their system was compromised and that
> one of the security mechanisms delivered with the system was shut off
> because I didn't understand it.

Craig, meet the usual suspects.  If you cross their absolutist views on
something, expect to be so engaged -- especially if you have any views
that are even remotely associated with mine (which can be far worse at
times, I fully admit ;-).

Whomever originally suggested that a UT2004/Quake4 fragfest was a far
better battlefield for this than the CentOS was dead-on!  Until then,
seek the appropriate enlightenment on the respective Fedora list when it
comes to Red Hat defaults on specific technologies:  

  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/  

My A64/7800GTX system is still waiting for a challenge!  I normally
don't have time to game, but I'm always game for a CentOS absolutist!

-- 
Bryan J. Smith   b.j.smith at ieee.org   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
For everything else *COUGH*commercials*COUGH* there's "ManningCard"