Dependency hell
Russell Coker
russell at coker.com.au
Sun Apr 11 10:35:05 UTC 2004
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 05:43, Panu Matilainen <pmatilai at welho.com> wrote:
> In the long run apt should probably run in it's own domain with suitable
> restrictions on the methods etc... but this all raises the question:
> How are 3rd party packages supposed to ship their own policy settings in
> a sane manner?
I've added rpm_exec_t entries for the apt programs in my tree.
If we are going to have apt as a recommended program or if we have some setup
with yum or up2date whereby one program gets the files and another does the
install (similar to the apt-get/dpkg) then we could write policy to
support/enforce that distinction.
However I expect apt to be phased out, so it's probably not worth doing.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
More information about the devel
mailing list