Re: Dependency hell

[Russell Coker <russell coker com au>]

On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 05:43, Panu Matilainen <pmatilai welho com> wrote:
> In the long run apt should probably run in it's own domain with suitable
> restrictions on the methods etc... but this all raises the question:
> How are 3rd party packages supposed to ship their own policy settings in
> a sane manner?

I've added rpm_exec_t entries for the apt programs in my tree.

If we are going to have apt as a recommended program or if we have some setup 
with yum or up2date whereby one program gets the files and another does the 
install (similar to the apt-get/dpkg) then we could write policy to 
support/enforce that distinction.

However I expect apt to be phased out, so it's probably not worth doing.

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/    Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page