On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 20:11 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 19:14, Kam Leo wrote: > >On 4/23/06, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Sunday 23 April 2006 17:17, Matthew Saltzman wrote: > >> >On Sun, 23 Apr 2006, Gene Heskett wrote: > >> >> On Sunday 23 April 2006 13:36, Lauri wrote: > >> >>> # chcon -t texrel_shlib_t > >> >>> /usr/local/Adobe/Acrobat7.0/Reader/intellinux/lib/*.so > >> >>> > >> >>> Lauri > >> >> > >> >> Thank you very much Lauri, that worked like a champ. But why > >> >> does it seem to be such a huge secret other than its ulitmately > >> >> being usefull to the blackhats? > >> >> > >> >> I assume that this command line (the top line above) can be used > >> >> against any other known good (we think) but similarly > >> >> malfunctioning (the bottom line above) program? > >> > > >> >Yes, if you are sure that's the malfunction. The binary NVIDIA > >> > driver's GLX and VMWare Workstation are the other examples I know > >> > of. Are there others? > >> > >> That question is rhetorical I assume as we won't know till it bites > >> us again if there are any others. But it does tend to show just how > >> much committment Adobe has in supporting linux. Their test box is > >> probably still running rh6.1... > >> > >> >-- > >> > Matthew Saltzman > >> > > >> >Clemson University Math Sciences > >> >mjs AT clemson DOT edu > >> >http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs > >> > >Gene, how is Adobe responsible for a problem caused by Red Hat / > >Fedora Core developers? You are using essentially the same version of > >Acrobat Reader that worked without problems for Fedora Core 4. It is > >not Adobe's fault that the Red Hat / Fedora Core implementers of > >SELinux changed the rules after Acrobat Reader 7 was released. If you > >have a bone to pick, take it up with the responsible party. > > Well now, I *thought* that was what I was doing in posting to this list. > and the fix did eventually come from here, no doubt deciphered by > someone intimatly familiar with selinux and the errors it may cause to > be thrown. As a new user to selinux, how would I have recognized that > error when the docs are so limited, literally one page, 1/3 of which is > credits. > > But it appears the fix is to request that Adobe include that command in > the rpms post-install script, so I have also requested that of Adobe. > > Applying logic, there isn't a whole lot the FC release crew could have > done or would need to do to alleviate it once the nature of the problem > was known. It is not their code to be responsible for, its Adobe's, so > if they want it to run on an as installed FC5 box, which it should, > then its up to them to fix it IMNSHO. > > Is this the wrong attitude on my part? ---- No - I agree that Adobe should run a post-install script that fixes the file contexts...all things in time, SELinux is still new to many outside of the Fedora world. Craig
