On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:09:24 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote: [....] > Before very much longer, I'm going to be forced to hop to another > distro. Because I am familiar with "the RH way", I had considered > CentOS. However, since RH insists on SELinux, I have pretty much > discarded that idea. > > It is clear, from the discussions I have seen here, that RH is COMMITTED > to SELinux, at least for the next few years, which decision I refuse to > follow. I like control over what gets installed in my machine, and > SELinux is not something I want. So, in order to get it off and keep it > off, I regretfully am not going to use any further RH distros or > derivatives, like CentOS, White Hat (is it dieing?) and Scientific > Linux. C'est la vie. [....] I must be missing something. The last few times I've done a Fedora install, anaconda has given me three SELinux choices -- enforcing, permissive, and disabled -- with a strongly worded recommendation against the last. I've always chosen permissive, partly because I know I'm nowhere near being able to cope with enforcing, and mainly because I have no idea what I'd be up against with disabled. But I'm already planning to insist on disabled with F8 -- barring any nasty surprises on my present #3 machine, where it's disabled now. So how much difference *is* there between disabled and not installed? -- Beartooth Staffwright, PhD, Neo-Redneck Linux Convert Remember I know precious little of what I am talking about.
