Bug 178608 – fresh installation "could not initialise browser's security component..."

Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.

Bug 178608 - fresh installation "could not initialise browser's security component..."

Summary:	fresh installation "could not initialise browser's security component..."

Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE

Aliases:	None

Product:	Fedora
Classification:	Fedora
Component:	firefox (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	rawhide
Hardware:	All Linux

Priority	medium Severity medium
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Christopher Aillon
QA Contact:
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2006-01-22 08:00 EST by Andy Burns
Modified:	2007-11-30 17:11 EST (History)
CC List:	1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2006-01-23 16:36:23 EST
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Andy Burns 2006-01-22 08:00:41 EST

Description of problem:

Performed fresh install of rawhide
Logged on as not-root user
received dialog "could not initialise browser's security component..."
with blurb about file permissions in profile directory, screenshot available if
it helps.

I suspected SELINUX issue as the same install had incorrect contexts on
/etc/resolv/conf which needed fixing with restorecon before dhclient would work,
did a restorecon -R /home/andy but to no avail, did an rm -rf
/home/andy/.mozilla no good either.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

rawhide 2006-01-20

Comment 1 Andy Burns 2006-01-23 16:36:23 EST

aftre updating to rawhide 2006-01-23 firefox (and thunderbird which was affected
too) runs OK without resorting to  SELINUX=0

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.