On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Harry Ciao <qingtao.cao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Differences from v1
> --------------------
>
> The v2 patchset just provides two minor changes from v1:
>
> 1. 0008-Preserve-tunables-when-required-by-semodule-program.patch
> Extract the codes to make use of sh->preserve_tunables flag in discard_tunable()
> from the 0007 patch in v1, and present them in this separate 0008 patch;
>
> 2. 0007-Create-a-new-preserve_tunables-flag-in-sepol_handle_.patch
> Fix an obvious error to mistakenly set sh->preserve_tunables flag in
> semanage_direct_connect(), which should be solely set according to the options
> passed for the semodule program.
>
> Then the preserve_tunables flag file in the module store could be properly
> removed if no "-P/--preserve_tunables" option used for semodule.
I tried to build fedora policy with this patch set and it didn't work
out this time. It complains about:
libsepol.bool_copy_callback: ppp: Mismatch between boolean/tunable
definition and usage for secure_mode_insmod
/usr/bin/semodule_link: Error while linking packages
And then stops building. I know you mentioned this as a known issue,
but previously I don't remember it failing to build. All I did was
apply the 8 patches in this series, then apply the 4 patches to policy
you sent a long time ago. Applying those 4 to fedora policy still
meant a couple of minor changes, but nothing directly to ppp.{te,if}
-Eric
--
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.
