Bug 432004
Summary: | cannot build without selinux | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | JW <ohtmvyyn> |
Component: | tar | Assignee: | Radek Brich <rbrich> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 8 | CC: | wwoods |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-03-19 12:36:05 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
JW
2008-02-08 12:05:17 UTC
I don't understand. There is a runtime option to enable storing of SELinux attributes and these attributes are ignored by default. SELinux-enabled tar should not do any harm if the option is not given. So, why should anyone need to build alternative tar without SELinux? If there is some specific problem with SELinux support, please report the bug. Thank you. Closing as NOTABUG... What harm would be done by making linkage with SElinux optional? Instead of just depending on runtime library detection. Many other packages do the right thing. What is so special about tar that it needs to implement a half-baked selinux configure? Why not implement --with-selinux? What is the problem with doing that? SELinux code is not present in upstream tar. It's all added by tar-1.17-xattrs-conf.patch and tar-1.17-xattrs.patch. If you want to build without SELinux support, don't apply those patches. (In reply to comment #3) > SELinux code is not present in upstream tar. It's all added by > tar-1.17-xattrs-conf.patch and tar-1.17-xattrs.patch. If you want to build > without SELinux support, don't apply those patches. Yes, no need for new configure option until the patches are in upstream. Closing this again... |