On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 09:22 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 15:58 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 22:48 +0200, Jiří Paleček wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:40:01 +0200, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 21:27 +0200, Jiří Paleček wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:07:38 +0200, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 00:17 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: > > > >> >> Stephen, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Would you like to say something about the following Patch ? > > > >> > > > > >> > Yes, it breaks the selinux testsuite for me. Please revert. > > > >> > > > >> How exactly does it break it? > > > > > > > > Running it via test_selinux.sh was generating errors like: > > > > cd: /testcases/bin: No such file or directory > > > > in selinux.outfile, producing a couple bogus FAILs. > > > > > > This is probably caused by the line setting LTPBIN (which shouldn't have > > > been there in the first place, my fault), does the attached patch fix it > > > for you? > > > > Nether applied this nor reverted the earlier one in this thread, as > > conclusion is yet to be made. But, i have to push the release today as i > > am going for a vacation for a couple of days. But, please send me the > > cleanups on consensus. I will do the needful when i return. > > If you apply the re-based patch that I posted in response to his, then > at least that problem is solved - no need to revert his original patch. > > I'd like to fork the refpolicy directory so that we can stop maintaining > diffs under selinux-testsuite/misc/ for post-rhel5 changes. So if you > could create a copy of refpolicy under selinux-testsuite, say > "rhel5-refpolicy", and cvs add that to the tree, then we can work from > there. Actually, I think I'd like to have a tree of test policies, e.g. refpolicy/trunk (test policy relative to refpolicy trunk) refpolicy/redhat/5 (test policy relative to rhel5) refpolicy/fedora/10 (test policy relative to fedora 10) refpolicy/debian/5 (test policy relative to debian 5.0) Only I'm not sure we necessarily want one for every fedora release due to their short life cycles. But it looks like the test policy for f11 will be different than f10 (I have a patch to at least get it to build without warnings, but am still working through some test failures on f11). -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
