Gentoo Archives: gentoo-hardened

From: Roel Vromen <roel@××××××.net>
To: gentoo-hardened@××××××××××××.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-hardened] problem with new policies?
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:40:23
Message-Id: 200504010940.25963.roel@vromen.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-hardened] problem with new policies? by Chris PeBenito
1 On Friday 01 April 2005 01:33, Chris PeBenito wrote:
2 > On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 23:27 +0200, Roel Vromen wrote:
3 > > but that doesn't seem to do anything in my case:
4 > >
5 > > make after make clean still gives a load of messages such as:
6 > > -------
7 > > #line 18
8 > > domains/admin.te:18:ERROR 'permission connected_socket_perms is not
9 > > defined forclass tcp_socket' at token ';' on line 4297:
10 > > allow sysadm_mail_t self:tcp_socket connected_socket_perms;
11 > > ------
12 >
13 > I'm assuming you're using selinux-base-policy-20050322. I doublechecked
14 > the tarball, and it is in macros/core_macros.te. So if its not
15 > existing, then either your policy is broken, or you didn't etc-update.
16
17 You were so right! The selinux-base-policy was in a series of updates.
18
19 Probably better if I spot a selinux-base-policy update to do a separate merge
20 (complete with the etc-update) for that one, and only THEN do the emerge -uD
21 world.
22
23 Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. Very much appreciated.
24
25 Roel

Replies

Subject Author
RE: [gentoo-hardened] problem with new policies? Sam & Dawn <srwusaf1@×××.net>