[Bug 1649713] Review Request: glusterfs-selinux - Gluster file-system specific selinux policy module

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1649713

Milind Changire <mchangir@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |mchangir@xxxxxxxxxx



--- Comment #3 from Milind Changire <mchangir@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Michael Scherer from comment #2)
> So, I can sponsor Milind.
> 
> So reading the spec files quickly, there is a few things to clean:
> 
> 1) There is no more need for BuildRoot, that's done automatically:
> 
> BuildRoot:      %(mktemp -ud
> %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)

Removed BuildRoot

> 
> 2) The same goes for defattr()

Removed defattr()

> 
> 3) Requires:	selinux-policy >= %{selinux_policyver} seems curious, where
> does POLICY_VERSION come from ?

Being a novice with SELinux, I'm unaware of where POLICY_VERSION comes from as
well.

> 
> 4) that's minor, but I think SELinux should have the right case in the
> summary

Corrected case for SELinux in Summary

> 
> 5) the %files install things in  %{_datadir}/selinux/devel/, but there is no
> requires on the packages that own that directory (selinux-policy-devel),
> that seems incorrect (and I found that container-selinux has the same
> problem).

Does that mean selinux-policy-devel be present on production systems as well ?
I'm just going by the -devel tag now that you mentioned it.

> 
> 6) for consistency, I would reuse the macro %modulename in 
> %attr(0644,root,root) %{_datadir}/selinux/devel/include/contrib/glusterd.if

Replaced glusterd with %{modulename}

> 
> 7) I am sure we need to have the file in /var/lib/selinux/ tagged with
> %ghost, especially since that seems to be a internal directory of selinux,
> so that may change in the future.

I presume item #7 is just a comment and is not an action item on me.

Thanks Michael for the review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux