From: mike.palmiotto@crunchydata.com (Mike Palmiotto)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:20:20 -0500
Subject: [refpolicy] Use of distro_rhel6/7 in refpolicy
In-Reply-To: <20151217171148.GA26674@x250>
References: <CAMN686GNnTThWuMvN-LTnLUjg9L+OizyQSgj-EF-QmeHpzFPaQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151217171148.GA26674@x250>
Message-ID: <CAMN686ETwR+ZmVrDpg_cJxBUtczMmTcTBNkEX0gD7JEszu3smA@mail.gmail.com>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Dominick Grift <dac.override@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:00:14PM -0500, Mike Palmiotto wrote:
>> It appears that the major-version-specific redhat ifdefs were
>> abandoned as of 6624f9cf7a3cdc3deb19ca680f559011a75e5e9f, in favor of
>> generic distro names. Considering the fact that there are some major
>> differences between RHEL6 and RHEL7, I wonder if it would be
>> worthwhile to re-introduce major version numbers. It seems like
>> current efforts have been using 'init_systemd,' but that doesn't seem
>> appropriate for non-systemd policy.
>
> I suspect "init_systemd" is probably the most accurate identifier you
> one can have in this case.
>
> systemd is not a RH specific technology even though it is heavily
> influenced by RH. Thus using "distro_rhel7" to indicate systemd seems
> like a bit of a stretch.

This is also true; however, I was referring to items which are RH
specific. Correct me if I'm wrong but there is probably policy outside
of the systemd changes which differs between RHEL6 and RHEL7.

Thanks,
--Mike

>
>>
>> Is there a particular reason why we wouldn't want to be more specific
>> with the distro ifdefs?
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> --Mike
>> _______________________________________________
>> refpolicy mailing list
>> refpolicy at oss.tresys.com
>> http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy
>
> - --
> 02DFF788
> 4D30 903A 1CF3 B756 FB48  1514 3148 83A2 02DF F788
> https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x314883A202DFF788
> Dominick Grift
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2
>
> iQGcBAEBCgAGBQJWcuzQAAoJENAR6kfG5xmcYGcL/3V0kK53j6JmKwviBix17hpw
> dgWYJYcuIw8gWcdG+ClAmt+mspPoxo324lvLvBsYOLK2c3KD/O4gDtezr+snLE89
> W/1pmZNW51Ved0muefZW892+aP6fYbYD9vjCXe19IlcQGiqXIZWad0J+qrlt2xbe
> rvHXpOTZ+a6HI7Mqkqmc2Gp4NG1tx1YbrgdOX1mNb0O5o6FAl6a4d3HwcWbej9R6
> KoOXm/EmzQB/JS68FxaCKJ8LgIrE4p0RhdXCXAoKNyGQSPpoMv6rpjJFUtkJPqcu
> 0+vkzUmIAPDXLhCQwGErRJ/Q/QHG14HLXB8/Xdj2y8zjHria2jKZl0iyI6gCl9/n
> QYSEY84/+dH72ROS9MJZMA6XBUUQTkBD/f2kQ9bQUJDYJREtQpvPisIW4//6Q3+G
> jzhURFK/csiOHibLuw9UR7ELfM3jg7IhT4Gei8EBCF116Kgoz6KabDh30LZfgObF
> Mqhk3P5UdM8diZNzqgz6br5mNWlfZkaGCya0EoOnJw==
> =xOGX
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----