Paul Howarth wrote:
Stephen Smalley wrote:
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 17:33 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
It contains a policy module, but the module only includes file contexts.
Clarification: it is a policy package (.pp), but the policy package
only includes file contexts. The module itself is just the .mod file
created by checkmodule; it never includes file contexts.
Ah, right, thanks for the clarification.
If this is going to be common, then semodule_package and libsemanage
need to allow for policy packages that have no policy module.
Is the absence of a policy module the actual cause of this error? If so,
would having a "dummy" policy module that was effectively a no-op (e.g.
by including an allow rule that was already in the base policy) be a
usable workaround?
Should this be bugzilla-ed?
Paul.
--
fedora-selinux-list mailing list
fedora-selinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list
