Hide Forgot
Description of problem: I was building a selinux-policy rpm package using the fedora spec but with different policy I suspect this bug is due to hard-coding but i am not sure Version-Release number of selected component: policycoreutils-devel-2.2.2-3.fc20 Additional info: reporter: libreport-2.1.9 cmdline: /usr/bin/python -Es /usr/bin/sepolicy manpage -a -p /home/dominick/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/selinux-policy-1-1.fc20.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8/ -w -r /home/dominick/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/selinux-policy-1-1.fc20.x86_64 dso_list: policycoreutils-python-2.2.2-3.fc20.x86_64 executable: /usr/bin/sepolicy kernel: 3.11.9-300.fc20.x86_64 runlevel: N 5 type: Python uid: 1000 Truncated backtrace: manpage.py:551:_format_boolean_desc:KeyError: 'kerberos_enabled' Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/sepolicy", line 644, in <module> args.func(args) File "/usr/bin/sepolicy", line 320, in manpage m = ManPage(domain, path, args.root,args.source_files, args.web) File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/sepolicy/manpage.py", line 440, in __init__ self.__gen_man_page() File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/sepolicy/manpage.py", line 519, in __gen_man_page self._nsswitch_domain() File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/sepolicy/manpage.py", line 607, in _nsswitch_domain """ % (self._format_boolean_desc(b),(", ".join(nsswitch_types)), b, b) File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/sepolicy/manpage.py", line 551, in _format_boolean_desc desc = self.booleans_dict[b][2][0].lower() + self.booleans_dict[b][2][1:] KeyError: 'kerberos_enabled' Local variables in innermost frame: self: <sepolicy.manpage.ManPage instance at 0x2ce6b48> b: 'kerberos_enabled'
Created attachment 833867 [details] File: backtrace
Created attachment 833868 [details] File: environ
This is a problem with policy.xml handling which is needed by sepolicy-manpage.
Miroslav do you have a fix?
Ok, I believe we need to run semanage-manpage with "--source_files" argument. Dominick, could you try to add this argument in the spec file for "semanage-manpage" calling?
At least it does not segfault, but i need to dig into this a bit deeper because i might need to adjust the option. I ran a quick test, and these were the results of that: + /usr/bin/sepolicy manpage --source_files -a -p /home/dominick/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/selinux-policy-4.100.99-99.fc20.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8/ -w -r /home/dominick/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/selinux-policy-4.100.99-99.fc20.x86_64 IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/dominick/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/selinux-policy-4.100.99-99.fc20.x86_64file_contexts' error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.LtXnGJ (%install) when adding this to the spec file: /usr/bin/sepolicy manpage --source_files -a -p %{buildroot}/usr/share/man/man8/ -w -r %{buildroot} mkdir %{buildroot}%{_usr}/share/selinux/devel/html htmldir=`compgen -d %{buildroot}%{_usr}/share/man/man8/` mv ${htmldir}/* %{buildroot}%{_usr}/share/selinux/devel/html rm -rf ${htmldir} Also i could not find "--source_files" in "man sepolicy-manpage" I think i need to take a little more time to test this
its looking for file_contexts file in the wrong place with --source_files argument. The file_contexts file is not in %{buildroot} or %{buildroot}/ With documentation of the --source_files argument it is kind of hard for me to determine what to specify without looking up the source of the script
Oops, s/With/Without
Yeap, you are right. The problem is with a custom buildroot where these files are needed and we need to change the code to say it to the user.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 20. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '20'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 20 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 20 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-06-23. Fedora 20 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.