Description of change/FAQ addition" Basically I installed a piece of third part software in the /opt, /usr/local ... directory When a user goes to execute the file he gets permission denied even though the protection is 755. He will need to change the security context to a executable context. chmod -t bin_t /FULLPATH Also they should add an entry to the /etc/security/selinux/src/policy/file_contexts/misc/ directory that specifies the security context so a relabel will maintain the security context. Version-Release of FAQ selinux-faq-1.0-4 (2004-04-05-T04:20-0800)
Two questions: 1. Should that be "chcon -t bin_t /FULLPATH"? 2. As a procedure, is this accurate: 1. Install software 2. chcon -t bin_t /path-to-executable 3. add entry to /etc/security/selinux/src/policy/file_contexts/misc/ specifying the security contex 4. run fixfiles /what/path?
Is this bug still a problem?
This is from a pretty early version of the FAQ, making it probably a FC 2 test 2 report, iirc that was before the strict/targeted split. But I haven't gone in to test, having lost the original context this bug came from. If you think it's resolved, I'm all for closing.
This really does not apply to FC3. So I am closing. We have enough other problems in the FAQ. Dan