How best get rid of SELinux?

[Mike McCarty]

Alan M. Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 17:43 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
>> I KNOW what SELinux is. I KNOW how it is intended to work.
> 
> Then why do you keep making demonstrably false statements about it? You
> started off saying that your hardware firewall provided sufficient
> protection. Then you kept screaming that you knew all about how it

For my machine, yes.

> worked even as multiple people tried in vain to explain that SELinux was
> there to help in cases that the firewall wouldn't help with. More

I understand what it is intended to do.

> recently, you've claimed that it works, mechanically, just like MSDOS
> Flu-shot+. To those who actually know what SELinux is about, neither of
> those is true.

No, not "just like..." anything. However, it works similarly
in attempting to trap accesess which are considered suspect.
I wasn't trying to draw any closer analogy than that.

>> How many times does THAT need to be explained?
> 
> Until that other Mike McCarty stops posting crap about SELinux.
> 
>> The apps I'm talking about are find, ls, mv, cp, ssh, etc.
> 
> Since the file contexts are required by the kernel, I see no reason
> (none) that ls shouldn't be able to show them to me based on a command
> line parameter. Otherwise, it's not "taking up cycles" as you have said.

Yes, "ls" doesn't. Other things do. I don't see why "ls" would need
to do anything more than have a few more bytes to format the state
of the extended attributes.

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!