From: pebenito@gentoo.org (Chris PeBenito) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:51:26 -0500 Subject: [refpolicy] optional_policy blocks In-Reply-To: <1295384185.7557.5.camel@tesla.lan> References: <1295361554.3083.8.camel@tesla.lan> <4D35AA8C.5050001@gmail.com> <1295366016.3083.14.camel@tesla.lan> <4D35BA30.6020002@gmail.com> <1295384185.7557.5.camel@tesla.lan> Message-ID: <4D36277E.3010400@gentoo.org> To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com On 1/18/2011 3:56 PM, Guido Trentalancia wrote: > Hello again ! > > On Tue, 18/01/2011 at 17.05 +0100, Dominick Grift wrote: >> Sounds strange indeed. Are you sure it is not including any of the >> policy in optional policy block or just some? >> >> If it is just incidental then it could be an error in the interface in >> the optional policy block. >> >> If this really applies to all optional policy then i guess something >> else is going on. > > Everything has been sorted out now. Maybe I was just getting confused by > the many denials... > > Optional policy blocks get included in the build. > > I shall post my patch to the git reference policy very soon. Should it > be posted with PATCH or RFC in the subject of the message ? I need > comments... How do you generally post patches that need comments here ? > > It would be a patch that allows the latest reference policy to work on a > modern system with dbus and xserver... > > I look forward to hearing from you. Here's the info for contributing: http://oss.tresys.com/projects/refpolicy/wiki/HowToContribute -- Chris PeBenito Developer, Hardened Gentoo Linux