-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jerry James wrote: > I'm working on getting GCL to run again. The current Debian patch > (which is enormous) fixes most problems, but not the long-running > SELinux problem that GCL has had. I took a hint from a thread on this > list a couple of months ago. I let make run until it crashed due to a > denied mprotect() call, did chcon -t java_exec_t on the binaries, and > restarted the make. It completed successfully. I can patch the > makefile to do the chcon call in the right place, but I'm worried > about getting the right security context on installation now. First, > is using java_exec_t in this way acceptable? Second, if so, how do I > ask for Fedora's policy to reflect that: bugzilla, request on this > list, some other list? Thanks, You can get the context of the final destination of the file using chcon `matchpathcon -n /usr/bin/gcl` LOCALPATH/gcl Which seems to be a fine way of doing. this. Of course I am guessing that gcl is the name of the executable. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkkSAAoACgkQrlYvE4MpobMH5gCbBjXxGYUFEsELC3bi3dOwEXEy TxcAoOs5vcMsDnUwHPmAZP05G/76273D =tQE6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
