[CentOS] SELinux threads, cynicism, one-upmanship, etc.
chrism at imntv.com
Thu Nov 17 23:12:44 UTC 2005
Lamar Owen wrote:
>After reading through the various SELinux threads, I really became quite
>perturbed. I mean, really quite perturbed.
If you get perturbed over something so trivial, perhaps it's time to
re-examine your priorities in life. 8-)
>As an IT Director (and the entire IT department, currently), if I were hiring
>a sysadmin I know for a fact that someone whose first response to a question
>on why something doesn't work is 'turn it off' would not get a job here.
Thank goodness I'm not an SA then. I also run, and have run in the
past, rather large IT departments. I also started out my unix life as a
SA. Now that we've gotten that out of the way...SELinux shouldn't be
turned on by default and in many cases simply creates extra
overhead/bloat on a system that doesn't really need it. Building a
firewall? Building a hardened box that's going to be exposed to the net
at a datacenter? Great, then it might be worth your while to wrestle
with it and take the time to figure out why it's breaking your
applications. All the really good SAs I've ever had, tended to be
somewhat frugal with their time and tended not to waste it on things
they didn't absolutely need or that didn't somehow make their lives easier.
>Neither would a sysadmin with as much cynicism as has been displayed, or an
>automatic 'it broke things' when something new (and in fact improved) comes
>along get a job here. Do realize that this list is archived, and that many
>people who are hiring might use Google to find your name (or mine, for that
Fantastic! I'll also state for the record here that I won't dig
ditches. So any potential employer intending to hire me for ditch
digging or sysadmining and is googling net archives can stop reading
More information about the CentOS