Re: SELinux userspace infrastructure language

On Thu, 31 May 2007 15:57:08 -0400
Karl MacMillan <kmacmill@redhat.com> wrote:

> > I think there are things that are very useful for us around config
> > file parsing, general string handling, etc. Also the graph library
> > would be great for some of the analysis tasks.

This is true, though last time I looked at the boost parser libraries (admittedly quite a few years ago) they felt more like a nice demonstration of how to abuse certain language features in new and interesting ways than a practical way to get things done. The other parts I've not yet had a need to use.

> > Last time I used it I kept a private copy and only linked in what I
> > used. I guess we could limit the use to python, though, and only
> > have it as a runtime requirement for the python bindings.

Yeah, in many cases this is the only reasonable way to use it. Which is a shame, really, because some small parts can be nice to have but aren't worth depending on the entire thing for.

> Most of boost is just headers, so it is just a compile time
> dependency.

Another good point, though my perception here is rather skewed towards Gentoo, where compile time dependencies are just as much of a pain, and boost is a really big compile time depend for just a couple of headers. That's fixed by importing small parts of it into the source tree, though, so it's not a massive problem.

--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.