[Mageia-dev] (second attempt) suggesting sectool be dropped

Thu Nov 17 13:49:04 CET 2011

On 17/11/11 10:26, Michael scherer wrote:
+> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:39:29AM +0100, Florian Hubold wrote:
+>> Am 15.11.2011 07:29, schrieb Michael Scherer:
+>>> Le lundi 14 novembre 2011 à 22:09 -0800, Robert M. Riches Jr. a écrit :
+>>>> (New list subscriber...needed to fix registered email address to post...)
+>>>>
+>>>> I was asked to submit this suggestion to the mailing list:
+>>>>
+>>>> As a Mageia user, I believe msec was much better off with_OUT_
+>>>> sectool.  In its present state, sectool is BADLY broken.  It
+>>>> whines for pages about file permissions that are exactly as they
+>>>> should be.
+>>> Can you be more specific ?
+>> It think he means this: https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2808
+>> or https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2255#c21 or
+>> https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2255#c22
+>>
+>> I've also become supportive of this, sectool is basically duplicating
+>> partly msec functionality, there was no adaption for Mageia, currently it's
+>> checking on Mageia with the upstream Fedora configuration.
+>>
+>> Honestly this should have been done when importing it, as
+>> tmb already mentioned. msec should be patched to not require it.
+>>
+>> When we can't even get our default security tool to work properly,
+>> what's the point in adding a second one which needs even more
+>> maintenance?
+>
+> As you say, the question is again "why was it uploaded in the first place".
+> It seems some packages were uploaded, and there seemed to have not enough
+> tests. While that's hard or impossible to avoid totally, that's not really
+> the way to achieve a good distribution :/
+>
+> I neither use msec or sectool, so I personnaly do not care that much.
+> Afaik, sectool was created by a ex mandriva/mandrake guy ( vincent danen ),
+> because he was ( rightfully ) wanting to rewrite  msec, who is/was
+> a mess of bash + python + perl code ( and rather ugly code, afaik, last time
+> I took a look ), but if msec is supported, and sectool is not, then I guess
+> we could drop. However, I still think we should first attempt to collaborate
+> and fix it. ( ie, always have the reflex of "try to fix and collaborate" ).
+>
+
+
+As one of the people who tested it and the one who filed the bug linked 
+to above which expresses the need for it to be configured, I object to 
+this being blamed on QA! It seems we are kicked whenever anything is wrong.
+
+I believe it is assigned to those higher up to provide a proper 
+configuration.
+
+The bug was dated 22nd September and as yet no configuration exists. 
+That does not reflect well on the distribution, not that QA haven't 
+performed sufficient testing, which we obviously did.
+
+Regards
+Claire Robinson
+
+
+