On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 08:55:11AM -0500, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On 03/09/2018 07:25 AM, Petr Lautrbach wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 10:19:26PM +0100, Nicolas Iooss wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On 03/06/2018 04:19 PM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > >>>> On 03/05/2018 05:16 PM, Nicolas Iooss wrote: > >>>>> libselinux and libsemanage Makefiles invoke site.getsitepackages() in > >>>>> order to get the path to the directory /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages > >>>>> that matches the Python interpreter chosen with $(PYTHON). This method > >>>>> is incompatible with Python virtual environments, as described in > >>>>> https://github.com/pypa/virtualenv/issues/355#issuecomment-10250452 . > >>>>> This issue has been opened for more than 5 years. > >>>>> > >>>>> On the contrary python/semanage/ and python/sepolgen/ Makefiles use > >>>>> distutils.sysconfig.get_python_lib() in order to get the site-packages > >>>>> path into a variable named PYTHONLIBDIR. This way of computing > >>>>> PYTHONLIBDIR is compatible with virtual environments and gives the same > >>>>> result as PYSITEDIR. > >>>>> > >>>>> As PYTHONLIBDIR works in more cases than PYSITEDIR, make libselinux and > >>>>> libsemanage Makefiles use it. > >>>> > >>>> On Fedora x86_64, this changes the install location from /usr/lib64 to /usr/lib. > >>> > >>> That said I agree we ought to be consistent, and it does seem that we are not currently. > >>> I'm just not sure what the best fix is in this case and the impact on distro packagers. > >> > >> Good point. I have read > >> https://marc.info/?l=selinux&m=151670320132614&w=2 too quickly (and > >> missed "given that there's only pure python modules"). This message > >> suggests that doing using get_python_lib(plat_specific=1) would keep > >> /usr/lib64 on Fedora (unfortunately I only have access to Debian, > >> Ubuntu and Arch Linux systems right now so I am not able to test). > > > > On Fedora Rawhide: > > > >>>> get_python_lib() > > '/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages' > >>>> get_python_lib(plat_specific=1) > > '/usr/lib64/python3.6/site-packages' > >>>> get_python_lib(prefix='/usr/local') > > '/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages' > >>>> get_python_lib(prefix='/usr/local', plat_specific=1) > > '/usr/local/lib64/python3.6/site-packages' > > > > > >> And > >> to be consistent, I suggest naming the variable differently from > >> PYTHONLIBDIR. For example: > >> > >> PYTHONPLATLIBDIR ?= $(shell $(PYTHON) -c "from distutils.sysconfig > >> import *; print(get_python_lib(plat_specific=1, prefix='$(PREFIX)'))") > >> > >> ... or PYPLATLIBDIR if PYTHONPLATLIBDIR is too long. Or we also can > >> keep the name PYSITEDIR while changing its definition, in order to > >> minimize the impact. What would be acceptable? > >> > > > > Given that libselinux and libsemanage provides only extension SWIG generated > > modules I'd just set plat_specific=1 and use PYTHONLIBDIR in this case. > > Looking at the Fedora packages (on 27), I see that: > > 1) libselinux-python{3} and libsemanage-python{3} puts all of their files under /usr/lib64 > 2) policycoreutils-python puts sepolicy under /usr/lib but the rest (e.g. seobject, sepolgen) under /usr/lib64 > > Meanwhile, a "make LIBDIR=/usr/lib64 SHLIBDIR=/lib64 install install-pywrap relabel" from selinux userspace (as per the README) installs the libselinux and libsemanage python modules under /usr/lib64 (the same as the Fedora packages) but all of the former policycoreutils ones (now python/*) under /usr/lib, and this seems to have been a change as part of Marcus' recent patch series (python: build: move modules from platform-specific to platform-shared). > > So is Fedora also going to move all of the policycoreutils-python modules to /usr/lib (maybe this has already happened in rawhide)? Yes. Everything from python/ will be moved to /usr/lib to follow the Marcus change. Currently, It's not in Fedora as I haven't rebased packages yet but it should happen soon in F28 and Rawhide.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
