On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 09:58:28AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On 05/04/2018 04:12 PM, Petr Lautrbach wrote: > > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 01:58:08PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > >> On 05/04/2018 07:51 AM, Petr Lautrbach wrote: > >>> From: Vit Mojzis <vmojzis@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> self.store is always a string (actual store name or "") because of > >>> semanageRecords.__init__. Fix check for not defined store. > >>> > >>> Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559174#c3 > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Vit Mojzis <vmojzis@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> python/semanage/seobject.py | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/python/semanage/seobject.py b/python/semanage/seobject.py > >>> index ac310ea6..c76dce85 100644 > >>> --- a/python/semanage/seobject.py > >>> +++ b/python/semanage/seobject.py > >>> @@ -2651,7 +2651,7 @@ class booleanRecords(semanageRecords): > >>> self.current_booleans = [] > >>> ptype = None > >>> > >>> - if self.store is None or self.store == ptype: > >>> + if self.store == "" or self.store == ptype: > >>> self.modify_local = True > >>> else: > >>> self.modify_local = False > >>> > >> > >> Is there a reason you didn't use if not self.store here? > >> > > > > There's a similar check on line 258 and this just follows the same pattern. > > Ok, I don't have a strong opinion on it either way, but noticed that it was recommended > to use not self.store in that bugzilla entry, comment #9, and was claimed to have been changed > in comment #10. Up to you. > I think that the important part of the message is not use `self.store is ""` as it has unpredictable behavior. The check `not self.store` is already in __init__ on line 252: 252 if not self.store: 253 self.store = getattr(args, "store", "") If there's no objection, I'd leave as it is now. FYI: I'll be offline most time of the week so I won't be able to respond to emails during this time.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
