On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 07:52 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > 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). Ok, I now have the selinux testsuite working on both f10 and f11 and have set up a separate subdirectory to keep a legacy copy of the test policy for rhel5. I'll send a patch under separate cover. -- 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.
