ReiserFS 3.6

[Rahul Sundaram]

goemon at anime.net wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>> goemon at anime.net wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, Tom wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Can Fedora install, r/w to existing R_FS partitions?
>>>
>>> Yes, but you will need to disable selinux. selinux does not run well 
>>> (or really, at all) on anything except ext3 at the moment.
>>> But I have had enough problems with selinux even on ext3 that I 
>>> usually install with selinux disabled anyway. Maybe by FC6 all the 
>>> selinux issues will be sorted out for production servers :)
>>
>> Hmm. Does that mean that hundreds of thousands of RHEL 4 systems 
>> running SELinux is just a flick out of my creative imagination?
>
>
> No it just means that I personally (and others) have issues with FC4 
> selinux on production servers, and that redhat has sarcastic and 
> snippy employees.
>
> i'm pretty sure i'm not imagining selinux issues:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status=REOPENED&field0-0-0=product&type0-0-0=substring&value0-0-0=selinux&field0-0-1=component&type0-0-1=substring&value0-0-1=selinux&field0-0-2=short_desc&type0-0-2=substring&value0-0-2=selinux&field0-0-3=status_whiteboard&type0-0-3=substring&value0-0-3=selinux 
>

Production systems do not mean bug free. If so there are no production 
systems at all. Just look at the number of bugs filed against any of the 
major components like Kernel, Openoffice.org. Evolution etc and you 
would find that bug reports are not by itself a decisive factor. You 
also include bugs in NEEDINFO which requires information from the bug 
reporter. NEW bugs are unconfirmed ones. MODIFIED ones might require 
confirmation from the reporter before being closed.  There are invalid 
bug reports and feature enhancements as well in there.  Nobody claimed 
the components are bug free.

-- 
Rahul 

Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers