| Summary: | Surprising statuses when verifying selinux-policy-targeted | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Göran Uddeborg <goeran> |
| Component: | selinux-policy-targeted | Assignee: | Miroslav Grepl <mgrepl> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Ben Levenson <benl> |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 16 | CC: | dwalsh |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | selinux-policy-3.10.0-45.1.fc16 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2011-10-25 03:34:12 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Göran Uddeborg
2011-10-11 20:57:03 UTC
My goal is to install these packages and update them. I don't want rpm to create rpmnew or rpmorig files. These files can be modified using SELinux commands only. If I am upgrading a package and the package notices that the policy has been modified then it will use the semanage commands to update the policy, if the files have not been modified then the files will be replaced and the policy will be updated. An updated modified configuration files takes 30-60 seconds to recompile and requires a lot of memory, while an unmodified system takes not time. I think I can add eliminate the other verifications. http://danwalsh.livejournal.com/45712.html I see. I had read the initial part of that log in the alpha announcement but didn't realize there was a connection here. And I wasn't aware that RPM only checks modification time to decide if a %config file had been changed. But faster updates certainly is something good. (Even if I'm afraid I'm personally tinkering a bit too much to take advantage of it very often on systems I maintain.:-) So take this report for what it is: I was a bit surprised by an suspicious looking pattern, and wondered if it really was intentional. If it is, then it's fine. More like floundering around to try to find the right combination... Should be fixed in selinux-policy-3.10.0-40.fc16 > Should be fixed in selinux-policy-3.10.0-40.fc16
Indeed. I installed -40 yesterday, and when I check now I get no warnings at all.
freddi$ sudo rpm -Vf /etc/selinux/targeted/modules/active/homedir_template
freddi$ rpm -q selinux-policy-targeted
selinux-policy-targeted-3.10.0-40.fc16.noarch
selinux-policy-3.10.0-43.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.10.0-43.fc16 Package selinux-policy-3.10.0-43.fc16: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing selinux-policy-3.10.0-43.fc16' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-14618 then log in and leave karma (feedback). Package selinux-policy-3.10.0-45.1.fc16: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing selinux-policy-3.10.0-45.1.fc16' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-14618 then log in and leave karma (feedback). selinux-policy-3.10.0-45.1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |