-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 04/29/2011 06:56 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 29.04.11 00:37, MichaĆ Piotrowski (mkkp4x4@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
I think it's a very good decision - I never understood why selinux dir is directly under /.
Yes, I think this would be a good thing to have in F16.
Note however that this needs a tiny kernel patch to work, to create the mount point under /sys/fs/selinux. This is a trivial patch and has been done for /sys/fs/cgroup before, so I assume this would be easy to get in and just needs a champion to push this forward.
By the way, maybe it would be good to think about the meaning of /srv existance? For seven years FHS requires that this directory exists http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE16A but "The methodology used to name subdirectories of /srv is unspecified as there is currently no consensus on how this should be done" - so even the authors of the standard did not have anything to say about how this directory should be used. Is there a rational reason for the existence of this directory besides FHS conformance?
I think /srv actually makes a lot of sense. Probably not so much on the desktop, but the boundaries are blurry, and I see no reason to set things up differently in this respect between servers and desktops. I see little benefit in removing this directory.
Lennart
I think moving /selinux is a bit more complicated then just a simple kernel change. We have libselinux changes, Lots of tools have learned over the years the path of /selinux and lots of users know about it.
I am willing to work towards the goal of moving /selinux, but I might end up with a symbolic link if we can not fix all of the problems.