Axel Thimm wrote:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:09:03PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
Axel Thimm wrote:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:27:24PM -0400, John Griffiths wrote:
Axel Thimm wrote:
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:07:37PM -0400, John Griffiths wrote:
Daniel J Walsh wrote:
John Griffiths wrote:
fedora-selinux-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Subject:
Error running ffmpeg due to permission denied on library
From:
"Robert Foster" <rfoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:41:09 +1000
To:
<fedora-selinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
<fedora-selinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
I'm trying to get ffmpeg working for Gallery2 on FC5, and getting
the following error (from the debug message via Gallery):
I had the same problem when using Kino which also uses ffmpeg. Here
is what I did and it works.
execstack -c /usr/lib/libmp3lame.so.0
execstack -c /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4
Please submit bugs on these to Kino and ffmpeg.
Actually /usr/lib/libmp3lame.so.0 is part of lame-3.96.1-10.rhfc5.at
and libxvidcore4-1.1.0-8.rhfc5.at both from ATRpms.net.
I'll let the people at ATRpm know.
Is this considered a packaging or upstream issue?
If packaging: What is the recommended way to fix it specfile-wise?
>From this, I find the folks at ATRpms know.
I'm very sure they'll be just as confused as I am ;)
Point them at
^^^^
Them is largely myself, that's why I can tell how confused "they" will
be. ;)
http://people.redhat.com/~drepper/selinux-mem.html
and
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/nonselsec.pdf
But these reference upstream fixing, not packaging ones. Do idioms
exist to cirumvent this at the packaging level (other than fixing the
source and Patch0: the fix), or is the recommendation to report to
upstream and wait for a fix while disabling selinux at the mean time?
How about executing
execstack -c /usr/lib/libmp3lame.so.0
execstack -c /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4
In the postinstall? If it does not break anything.
--
fedora-selinux-list mailing list
fedora-selinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list
