From: domg472@gmail.com (Dominick Grift)
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 17:33:51 +0100
Subject: [refpolicy] [ userdomain patch 1/1] Fix various interfaces to
 use permission sets for compatiblity with open permission.
In-Reply-To: <1267632639.30557.98.camel@gorn.columbia.tresys.com>
References: <20100303160816.GA22737@localhost.localdomain>
	<1267632639.30557.98.camel@gorn.columbia.tresys.com>
Message-ID: <20100303163349.GA21101@localhost.localdomain>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

I do realize that, and yes it is a bit (too?) enthousiastic. However those permissions sets are there for a reason too.
It pretty odd though to have a getattr_file_perms set just for the getattr permission.

To the point i do nott think those non-open permission sets do harm. except maybe the exec_files_perms.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://oss.tresys.com/pipermail/refpolicy/attachments/20100303/033ef339/attachment.bin