[CentOS] CentOS 5 + Quagga + SELinux

Thu Mar 6 20:53:22 UTC 2014
Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh at redhat.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/06/2014 01:15 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> All in the world, or all that have been created for currently
>>> installed packages?   Is this as bad as rpm packaging where any two
>>> different sources are likely to conflict in name and/or contents?
>>> 
>> Well we have not had this problem over the years, since most people
>> upstream their policy.  Right now if a customer installed a policy file
>> which conflicted with the base policy, it will get overwritten.  I guess
>> if they did it will rpm then it would get you an RPM error/warning.
> 
> What does 'upstream' mean in the context of packages that aren't included
> in RHEL base or EPEL?  It just seems like a giant list of global variables
> without any structure or namespace management.
> 
Not sure what you mean but these are files on a file system, Which I guess you
define as a giant list of global variables.  The names tend to match the name
of the package they are confining.  sshd.pp confined sshd for example.

selinux-policy is a big upstream project hosted at tresys, where you would
discover the conflicting names.

We don't tend to add few new policy packages to a major rhel release.

So it is unlikely that we would have a conflict with a name in an Enterprise
release.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlMY4EIACgkQrlYvE4MpobNEKwCdG3do+6eBjN0U0An343JPxwaG
LEcAn3XBR5C/CInC8cuRmyM1hQ3ZiwcD
=UZlW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----