Bug 2124826

Summary:	Wrong error message in French language for semanage fcontext
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8	Reporter:	Welterlen Benoit <bwelterl>
Component:	policycoreutils	Assignee:	Vit Mojzis <vmojzis>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Twinkle <tpardesh>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	8.6	CC:	dwalsh, lvrabec, mmalik, plautrba, vmojzis
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Triaged
Target Release:	---	Flags:	pm-rhel: mirror+
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	policycoreutils-2.9-24.el8	Doc Type:	No Doc Update
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-05-16 09:11:23 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Welterlen Benoit 2022-09-07 08:17:48 UTC

Description of problem:

[root@rhel86 ~]#  semanage fcontext -a -t passwd_file_t -s system_u /etc/security/opasswd
ValueError: Le contexte du fichier pour /etc/security/opasswd n'est pas défini
[root@rhel86 ~]# export LANG=ENG
[root@rhel86 ~]#  semanage fcontext -a -t passwd_file_t -s system_u /etc/security/opasswd
ValueError: File context for /etc/security/opasswd already defined


In French, it should be: "Le contexte du fichier pour /etc/security/opasswd est déjà défini" and NOT "n'est pas défini", which means: is not defined
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEL 8.6
policycoreutils-python-utils-2.9-19.el8.noarch

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. set language is French
2. try to add a label already existing
3.

Actual results:
Wrong error message

Expected results:
Error message:
"Le contexte du fichier pour /etc/security/opasswd est déjà défini"

Additional info:

Comment 1 Vit Mojzis 2022-09-07 08:45:05 UTC

Thank you for reporting the issue. Would you mind fixing the translation in https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=6741cf68c39c17b9&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition (rhel 8) and https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/python/fr/?checksum=6741cf68c39c17b9&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition (Fedora and Rhel 9)?

It seems that other occurrences of "already defined" are mostly translated to "est déjà définie", or "existe déjà":
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=716953929af86ea&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=9eed9f183a88ca8&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=38bf3470cef443e6&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=ccc71a5cb3f5ac2&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=2ca57b137e498ee&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=72489bc8eff4e756&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/translate/selinux/rhel8python/fr/?checksum=4ab7c6d76ad3f7d6&q=already+defined&sort_by=-priority%2Cposition

Is that correct?

Comment 2 Welterlen Benoit 2022-09-07 08:55:38 UTC

Yes, that's correct.

I translated it in https://translate.fedoraproject.org/

Thank you !

Benoit

Comment 3 Vit Mojzis 2022-09-07 14:58:20 UTC

Thank you.
I didn't find any changes in the translation repo from you so I changed it based on https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124826#c0 
See:
https://translate.fedoraproject.org/projects/selinux/#history

Comment 4 Welterlen Benoit 2022-09-07 20:35:17 UTC

Thanks, I certainly did'nt go to the end of the process ...

Comment 5 Vit Mojzis 2022-10-11 14:39:38 UTC

The fix should be available in rhel 8.8 and 9.1.

Comment 16 errata-xmlrpc 2023-05-16 09:11:23 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (policycoreutils bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2023:3034