[apparmor] apparmor policy versioning

[Jamie Strandboge]

On 07/17/2013 05:57 PM, John Johansen wrote:
> On 07/11/2013 12:55 PM, Christian Boltz wrote:
>>> v2 policies can stay
>>> as v2 until we test them under v3 and then have them in both. I think
>>> we need to do it this way since people might reboot into different
>>> kernels and while policy should load and I don't think we guarantee
>>> that v3 policy compiled with a v3 parser loaded into a v2 kernel will
>>> work as expected (ie, just like v2 policy, v2 policy and a v2
>>> kernel). As such, when both exist, use the one that is appropriate
>>> for the kernel.
>>
>> Exactly this is the reason why I don't like to have a separate directory 
>> with a duplicated set of the profiles. I have more than enough 
>> experience with code duplication[2], and learned to avoid the "cp" 
>> command at any price.
>>
> yes this can be a problem
> 
>> With an additional copy of the profiles, we'll end up in a maintenance 
>> hell - and users will kill us because they have to update two profiles 
>> instead of one if they want to switch kernels.
>>
> we end up with maintenance hell either way, its just deciding between
> which one is the 8th or 9th plane there of
> 
It feels much cleaner and easier to manage with separate directories. I
acknowledge there is a maintenance cost, but we have a review process that
should keep us honest. I don't think the added cost of maintaining in two places
is nearly as risky or burdensome as trying to get all the corner cases handled
correctly.

-- 
Jamie Strandboge                 http://www.ubuntu.com/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 899 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/apparmor/attachments/20130718/50f22d8d/attachment-0001.pgp>