On Tue, 2017-10-24 at 00:10 +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote: > Dear Ben, > > Thanks for the ping! > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > Sadly, linux has again failed to build on armel in experimental due to > > the image size growing too large. > > Yes, I noticed this armel FTBFS issue. > However, the solution simple solution, you mentioned in previous email > [0], has been used. > Now I think we have to touch the crypto module part, which affects > cryptsetup/initramfs-tools. > I'll try this approach this week. > > [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2017/05/msg00040.html
Since we are preparing to enable AppArmor by default, I looked at the armel config and found that it still had SECURITY_SELINUX enabled (but no other LSMs). I've just committed a change to the sid branch that disables that and enables SECURITY_APPARMOR instead. AppArmor appears to be smaller than SELinux, possibly by enough to fix this. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The most exhausting thing in life is being insincere. - Anne Morrow Lindberg
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
