On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 03:06, Paul Nasrat pauln@truemesh.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:07:43AM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Tom Mitchell (mitch48@sbcglobal.net) said:
If I understand this...
In development cycles having the "current" best practice policy does make sense for some, but not outside the context of "default policy development".
Yes, but if you're pushing new policy that actually fixes bugs (think post-release here), you'd want that automatically installed on upgrade.
I believe Jeff was working on this, however the hooks would have to be in rpm I imagine as you probably don't want rpm_script_t having write access to policy_src_t right?
At the moment rpm_script_t has access to so much that there's no point in trying to impose any serious restriction on it.
I suspect that limiting rpm_script_t in any significant way will have to wait until we have multiple domains for rpm for installing packages with different signatures.