[CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.comTue Jan 10 20:04:17 UTC 2012
- Previous message: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
- Next message: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh at redhat.com> wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Daniel J Walsh >>>> <dwalsh at redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Now if only more people used RHEL we could further enhance >>>>> the products. :^) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why isn't it accepted as more of a standard? >>>> >>> I don't understand the question. >> >> Why is it vendor-specific to RHEL? >> > I was talking Money not vendor specific. The question meant as a jab > was if more people used RHEL instead of Centos, we could pay more > developers. I thought the @redhat.com would signify why I would want > that. :^) OK, I can understand why you would want that. I don't understand why you think anyone else would want even more nonstandard variations in linux distributions. And if this isn't intended to be vendor-specific, why isn't it an independent upstream project or included in the kernel? --- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
- Previous message: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
- Next message: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list