Skip to content

Separate domtrans/run interfaces for portage_fetch

Christopher J. PeBenito selinux-refpolicy 2 versions – New

Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]

Versions newest first · linked by author and title

  1. v2 Latest1 of 4 patches 0 repliesNew
  2. v11 patch 0 repliesSuperseded

1 of 4 patches is in this archive. The cover letter announces 4.

Patches in v2 No applies recorded yet

#Subject and filesSizeRepliesApplied
4/4Allow unconfined users to call portage features+0 -00 replies

Reviews trailers per patch

No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v2 yet.

Read the v2 thread

Cover letter [refpolicy] [PATCHv2 0/4] Separate domtrans/run interfaces for portage_fetch
Quoted 10 lines · Sven Vermeulen

This revised patchset updates the portage interfaces to support portage_run_fetch and portage_domtrans_fetch, rather than including the support for portage_fetch_t in the regular portage_run and portage_domtrans interfaces.

I'm not sure how to best "mix" changes across refpolicy and refpolicy::contrib. If the patches are not correctly made, this was what I did:
- Make changes in contrib, then format-patch to generate patches
- Make changes in refpolicy, then format-patch to generate patches

I'm not sure what the best way is either. The way you did it is fine.

Quoted 9 lines

I notice that git also supports "adding" the commits from contrib to the patches in the main refpolicy, but I'm not sure that's the idea behind it for refpolicy.

Changes since v1
----------------

- Removes the portage_fetch_t calls from portage_domtrans and portage_run
- Adds callers for portage_fetch_t (sysadm, unconfined and puppet for now)

Merged.

Signature · 3 lines
Chris PeBenito
Tresys Technology, LLC
www.tresys.com | oss.tresys.com

Read the cover letter in its thread