olivares14031 at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 20 15:29:54 UTC 2012
--- On Fri, 4/20/12, Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh at redhat.com> wrote:
> From: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh at redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812100
> To: "For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases" <test at lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Cc: "Antonio Olivares" <olivares14031 at yahoo.com>, "Selinux List at Fedora Project" <selinux at lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Date: Friday, April 20, 2012, 5:37 AM
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Somehow /etc/ld.so.cache file got mislabeled? Was this an
> initial install?
> Install from livecd?
Installed from nightly build before rc4 and/or beta was released.
> Running restorecon on /etc/ld.so.cache
> will fix the
> label, as the setroubleshoot tells you. Does the file become
> mislabeled again?
Will try it later tonight and see what happens.
> If we could figure out how it got mislabeled we would gladly
> fixed it, if we
> get one bug from one person reporting a file is mislabeled,
> and do not hear
> about it from others, we assume it is a one off and tell the
> user to follow
> what setroubleshoot told them to do. If we see it repeatedly
> or from multiple
> users we will do our best to investigate what is going on.
> We have a rule in policy now that says if any unconfined
> domain creates this
> file it will get labeled correctly, This include
> unconfined_t, initrc_t,
> rpm_t, rpm_script_t. So I do not know how it got mislabeled.
> Does the file
> first get created with a different name and then renamed to
More information about the test