On 03/18/2011 11:43 AM, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 07:41:37AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote: >> Hi Sven, >> >> Did you identify what the wierdness was. I'd like to eventually clean >> up the profiles. Rather than > [...] >> I'd like the selinux to conform to the hardened/linux/amd64, ie change >> 10-16 to just >> >> selinux/v2refpolicy/amd64 >> selinux/v2refpolicy/amd64/no-multilib >> >> The /desktop /developer /server would not be deprecated, but present >> silently as they are for hardened/linux/amd64. > > No. > > Beneith is the current "inheritance" of the profile (using the "parent" > file and using the same order as presented in the file). > > selinux/v2refpolicy/amd64/hardened > `- selinux/v2refpolicy/amd64 > +- default/linux/amd64 > | +- base > | +- default/linux > | '- arch/amd64 > `- selinux/v2refpolicy > `- selinux > `- base > > "base" and "selinux" both have use.mask on "multilib". So one would > imagine that the current profile does /not/ allow multilib (you are > not allowed to set the "multilib" USE flag). There's no profile that > has a use.force on multilib. > > Or I could be completely wrong in this small analysis. > > I'm no profile/portage wizard though. Anyone up to the challenge? > > Wkr, > Sven Vermeulen
You're not wrong, but this can be restructured to come better in line with the rest of the hardened profiles. I have to do a careful analysis of the stacking and see if we can get something similar out of simpler stackings and then fix up what might be missed in the final layers of the stack. This is still far off. First stabilization. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Developer
