Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21 2009, Eric Laganowski wrote:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21 2009, Stephen Smalley wrote:
Re flex: What is the requirement for flex from selinux
perspective? Is it known what build of flex is "known good"?
My impression is that one of the patches carried by the distributions
for flex is needed for checkpolicy to work, but no one has ever fully
investigated the precise dependency - people just grab the Fedora srpm
and apply those patches to flex, and then rebuild checkpolicy and it
works. I haven't seen any complaints from Debian or Gentoo so I presume
that they also carry the same patches for flex.
flex -V here also shows 2.5.35. But there are three patches in the
Fedora package. Attached.
Debian currently carries 13 (though 3 of them need to be
squashed together) patches against 2.5.35. I can make them available if
there is interest.
manoj
Yes please. Patches would be welcome.
ok. I have put all the patches at:
http://www.golden-gryphon.com/software/misc/flex-patches/
If you want to browse the git repository and see which topic
branches these patches come from, you may browse the repo at:
http://git.debian.org/?p=users/srivasta/debian/flex.git
The upstream sources are in the upstream branch, and the various
topic--[!old]foo branches are feature branches, and master is the
integration branch that Debian packages are built from.
I hope this helps.
manoj
Cool, thanks for those.
not sure if I'm hitting the same issue,
but I am hitting something.
from checkpolicy crapping out to not being able to
install mcs/mls, only standard(but only on the first go of it)
leading me to believe that I'm missing something during my build
with some of the required packages.(system is an LFS build,
things like this are the norm).
Justin P. Mattock
--
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.
