How best get rid of SELinux?
andy at warmcat.com
Sun Sep 23 05:46:58 UTC 2007
Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> b43-phy0 ERROR: LO control pair validation failed (I: 111, Q: 111, used 1,
> calib: 0, initing: 0)
> And seemingly generated when b43 attempts to set the local oscillator. Or is
> that b43's way of bitching about the radio channel? DamnifIknow.
I guess LO really is Local Oscillator in this case. I would definitely
throw out ndiswrapper until I really really had no choice. b43 is still
getting worked on pretty hard, it is also sensitive to the version of
firmware you are using in /lib/firmware.
> Anybody got a clue to lend me? Latest F7 kernel but I saw it on the previous
> one before I rebooted to the new one too.
> I left this message sitting on screen, and went to do some shopping for eats,
> then went to the shop to cut the last two mortises in a side rail for a
> cabinet, and when I came back in just now, the last such messages showing in
> the messages tail were slightly different, but still generated a stack trace,
> naming rfatt=6, bbatt=5, and was at 15:42 pm, its now 20:01. Self repairing?
I think some of the stack backtraces in this case can be for debugging,
but I don't know.
> So, ATM I have not run into an selinux problem while running in permissive but
> live mode.
> Progress at making it more 'user friendly'? Perhaps. I'll leave it setup as
> now & see how I fare trying to do my usual stuffs.
Well the best thing selinux can do is be "user invisible", but I'm glad
that you also found it has gotten better enough since you last tried it
that you can consider to see how it goes.
More information about the users