reassign 463835 selinux-policy-default thanks
On Thursday 07 Feb 2008 11:28:16 Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:33:06 +0000, Mark Brown <[email protected]> said: > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:51:25PM +0100, Erich Schubert wrote: > >> How about you just follow the same road that Exim took? Develop the > >> module, send it to SELinux policy upstream, who happily included it > >> in policy upstream. When the refpolicy package is updated again > >> (Manoj seems to be MIA?), then we can close this bug. > > > > I reassigned the bug to a SELinux package and it was immediately > > bounced back to the Leafnode package. What this tells me is that you > > do not wish to see this fixed in the SELinux packages but would rather > > see this fixed in the Leafnode package. Now you're telling me that > > this should, as I had originally understood, be fixed in the SELinux > > packages. > > Please assign such bugs to selinux policy packages -- either > strict or targeted, at your discretion. I was not involved in pushing > the report away from selinux packages, and have not been able to pay > much attention to Debian until recently. > > > Either you want me to implement SELinux support in the Leafnode > > package or you want this to be done in the SELinux packages. Which is > > the case? > > Either would work. > > manoj -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf RESEARCHUT - http://www.researchut.com "Necessity is the mother of invention."
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
