Re: One question about security label command

> * It is really the version of libselinux.so that matters here. RHEL
> 7.x has libselinux 2.2.x whereas RHEL 6.x has 2.0.x. The latter lacks
> functionality required by sepgsql starting with PG 9.2.

Yes, that has been my observation as well.

> So given all that, here is what I propose we do:
>
> 1.) Commit Kouhei's patch against HEAD and 9.5 (Joe)
> 2.) Commit my modified patch against 9.4 and 9.3 (Joe)
> 3.) Rework patch for 9.2 (Kouhei)
> 4.) Finish standing up the RHEL/CentOS 7.x buildfarm member to
>     test sepgsql on 9.2 and up. The animal (rhinoceros) is running
>     already, but still needs some custom scripting. (Joe, Andrew)
> 5.) Additionally stand up a RHEL/CentOS 6.x buildfarm member to test
>     sepgsql on 9.1 (no changes) (Joe).
>
> Sound like a plan?

I think this makes sense.  Getting buildfarm coverage on any level is
better than nothing, IMHO.  Kind of a bummer that 9.1 is the only
version that will work as-is on EL6 but it is what it is for now, I
suppose.

-Adam

-- 
Adam Brightwell - adam.brightwell@crunchydatasolutions.com
Database Engineer - www.crunchydatasolutions.com