From: Lennart Poettering
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] A missing SELinux unit access check due to
unexpected UNIT_NOT_FOUND unit object
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:34:40 +0200
> On Fri, 19.06.15 12:06, HATAYAMA Daisuke (d.hatay...@jp.fujitsu.com) wrote:
>
>> From: Lennart Poettering
On Fri, 19.06.15 12:06, HATAYAMA Daisuke (d.hatay...@jp.fujitsu.com) wrote:
> From: Lennart Poettering
> Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] A missing SELinux unit access check due to
> unexpected UNIT_NOT_FOUND unit object
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:23:25 +0200
>
> > O
From: Lennart Poettering
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] A missing SELinux unit access check due to
unexpected UNIT_NOT_FOUND unit object
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:23:25 +0200
> On Thu, 18.06.15 18:14, HATAYAMA Daisuke (d.hatay...@jp.fujitsu.com) wrote:
>
>> Currently, there's a
On Thu, 18.06.15 18:14, HATAYAMA Daisuke (d.hatay...@jp.fujitsu.com) wrote:
> Currently, there's a behavior that an unit object in UNIT_NOT_FOUND
> generated via After= dependency is unexpectedly? left in
> manager->units hash table and SELinux unit access check is not
> performed.
No this is exp
Currently, there's a behavior that an unit object in UNIT_NOT_FOUND
generated via After= dependency is unexpectedly? left in
manager->units hash table and SELinux unit access check is not
performed.
I'm investigating this now but I don't figure out whether this is a
really a bug or not because thi
