On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Eric Paris <eparis@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 14:49 -0400, Fulko Hew wrote: > >> If so... why use chcon versus the semanage/restorecon technique? >> or if my assesement is wrong... can someone point me to a better >> explanation/tutorial? ... snip ... > So semanage+restorecon == will last, chcon == will likely get blown away > and make you angry later. Thanks for confirming that for me. Now my next issue is 'apparently' unknown contexts. My original RPM spec file added the 'httpd_sys_rw_content_t' context to a directory. Which was great for the versions of Fedora I was testing on, but now in RHEL 5.6 semanage complains with: "type 'httpd_sys_rw_content_t' not defined." So it seems that my %post section of my RPM file has to either 'know' what distribution or version of selinux support is installed so I can avoid attempting to use types that are not defined, or having some way of finding out what 'types' are available 'in this OS' so that I issue the 'appropriate commands'. How can I find out what 'types' are available'? Fulko -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
