On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 03:00:49PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 02:18:46PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > is there any good reason for the recommends of apparmor in the latest > > linux packages? > > This is in response to a discussion that happened on this list. The > thread started in august last year[1], but really picked up speed last > month[2] and this one[3]. > > The idea is that, if no critical issues are found, buster would release > with AppArmor enabled by default. If critical issues are found, however, > I expect the decision will be reversed (or at the least, postponed). > > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/08/msg00090.html > [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/10/threads.html#00086 > [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/11/threads.html#00000 >
This doesn't strike me as a discussion, but looks more like a predetermined setup.
