Alvaro, KaiGai, * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Kohei KaiGai wrote: > > > This regression test fail come from the base security policy of selinux. > > In the recent selinux-policy package, "unconfined" domain was changed > > to have unrestricted permission as literal. So, this test case relies multi- > > category policy restricts unconfined domain, but its assumption is not > > correct now. > > Makes sense. > > > The attached patch fixes the policy module of regression test. > > What branches need this patch? Do we need a modified patch for > earlier branches? > > Could you provide a buildfarm animal that runs the sepgsql test in all > branches on a regular basis?
Would be great if KaiGai can, of course, but I'm planning to stand one
up here soon in any case.
> > However, I also think we may stop to rely permission set of pre-defined
> > selinux domains. Instead of pre-defined one, sepgsql-regtest.te may be
> > ought to define own domain with appropriate permission set independent
> > from the base selinux-policy version.
>
> Is this something we would backpatch?
As it's just a change to the regression tests, it seems like it'd be a
good idea to backpatch it to me as there's very low risk of it breaking
anything and it'd actually fix the tests when they're run.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
