Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 1548509

Summary: tps-srpmtest failing 7.5 errata
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Reporter: Steeve Goveas <sgoveas>
Component: libsepolAssignee: Vit Mojzis <vmojzis>
Status: CLOSED CANTFIX QA Contact: BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 8.1CC: dapospis, grajaiya, jhrozek, lslebodn, lvrabec, mkosek, mmalik, mthacker, mzidek, nsoman, pbrezina, plautrba, sbose, sgoveas, tscherf, vmojzis
Target Milestone: betaKeywords: Reopened
Target Release: 8.1   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-06-05 11:41:15 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:
Bug Depends On: 1682492    
Bug Blocks:    

Comment 11 Milos Malik 2018-03-13 08:25:28 UTC 
I thought the issue was solved by fixing BZ#1548020.
Comment 12 Vit Mojzis 2018-03-13 15:10:11 UTC 
It should be.
Steeve, could you please confirm that the issue is fixed when using libsemanage-2.5-11.el7?
Comment 13 Steeve Goveas 2018-03-15 07:27:48 UTC 
I ran the tps-rpmtests again. libsemanage-2.5-11.el7 is installed

[root@vm-idm-023 ~]# rpm -q sssd libsemanage libsepol
sssd-1.16.0-19.el7.x86_64
libsemanage-2.5-11.el7.x86_64
libsepol-2.5-8.1.el7.x86_64
libsepol-2.5-8.1.el7.i686

[root@vm-idm-023 tps]# rpm -q --requires libsemanage
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
audit-libs
bzip2-libs
config(libsemanage) = 2.5-11.el7
libaudit.so.1()(64bit)
libbz2.so.1()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.8)(64bit)
libselinux >= 2.5-12
libselinux.so.1()(64bit)
libsepol >= 2.5-8
libsepol.so.1()(64bit)
libsepol.so.1(LIBSEPOL_1.0)(64bit)
libsepol.so.1(LIBSEPOL_1.1)(64bit)
libustr-1.0.so.1()(64bit)
libustr-1.0.so.1(USTR_1.0)(64bit)
libustr-1.0.so.1(USTR_1.0.1)(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1

[root@vm-idm-023 tps]# rpm -q --whatprovides "libsepol.so.1()(64bit)"
libsepol-2.5-8.1.el7.x86_64
Comment 14 Milos Malik 2018-03-26 15:10:49 UTC 
Can we close this bug as a duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1548020 ?
Comment 15 Vit Mojzis 2018-03-27 08:40:10 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1548020 ***
Comment 18 Petr Lautrbach 2019-06-05 11:41:15 UTC 
We can't fix it right now due to possible break of backward compatibility. But we'll increase symbol versions when we add new symbol in future in order to prevenbt this problem.