On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 14:25:09 +1100, Russell Coker wrote: > On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Russell Coker <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Julien Cristau <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Is it too late to get a fix in Squeeze? > > > > > > Depends. How soon can you have one ready, and how much churn does your > > > new version imply? > > > > I've uploaded a small change to selinux-basics that addresses the issue of > > a failing upgrade. It also uses "set -e" on shell scripts to better > > support using "bash -x" to run them. Can this go in Squeeze? > > > > I'm also preparing a new policy package which makes several things work > > which should go in Squeeze. It will be ready within 24 hours. > > Slightly more than 24 hours, but I'm uploading refpolicy 0.2.20100524-5 right > now. > > I have added a lot of allow rules of the form "allow daemon to read it's > config files so it can start". While the number of changes is fairly high, > there are few changes of any great note and hardly any changes to things > which > would otherwise work. > > I've also removed amavis.pp which didn't work (no loss there). > > I believe that this new version is suitable for squeeze. > Thanks. It doesn't look like any of this covers the upgrade path from lenny, though. I.e. at the very least a NEWS.Debian entry telling users what they need to do to keep selinux working when upgrading to squeeze, since the maintainer scripts don't seem to take care of it automatically. Could you add something like that?
Cheers, Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
