| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, 张元超 <zhangyuanchao(at)highgo(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: One question about security label command |
| Date: | 2015-03-16 14:09:01 |
| Message-ID: | 29476.1426514941@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
>> Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>>> The attached patch fixes the policy module of regression test.
>> Is this something we would backpatch?
> As it's just a change to the regression tests, it seems like it'd be a
> good idea to backpatch it to me as there's very low risk of it breaking
> anything and it'd actually fix the tests when they're run.
Do we need to worry about machines that are still running the older
selinux policy? I'm not sure it's a net win if we fix the regression
tests for latest-and-shiniest by breaking them elsewhere. Especially
not if we're going to back-patch into older branches, which are likely
to be getting run on older platforms.
The idea of making the regression test entirely independent of the
system's policy would presumably solve this problem, so I'd kind of
like to see progress on that front.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-03-16 14:16:25 | Re: One question about security label command |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-03-16 13:51:41 | Re: One question about security label command |