On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 20:41:51 -0500, Tom Horsley <tom.horsley@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > So why isn't it much simpler and less trouble to just turn off > selinux in the first place? I get the same level of security in the > end, and much less hassle in the meantime :-). Because you can still leave it protecting other processes on the system by either using pemissive domains or using audit2allow to generate rules you can use to add a new policy module. What would be really nice is if people reported these issues to bugzilla instead of or in addition to griping about them here. Then either the app or the policy could be fixed for everyone else. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
