Project

Profile

Help

Issue #5994

Name clash with the SELinux policy for Pulp2

Added by evgeni about 1 month ago. Updated 26 days ago.

Status:
CLOSED - CURRENTRELEASE
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
-
Sprint/Milestone:
-
Start date:
Due date:
Severity:
2. Medium
Version:
Platform Release:
Blocks Release:
OS:
Backwards Incompatible:
No
Triaged:
Yes
Groomed:
No
Sprint Candidate:
No
Tags:
Katello-P2, SELinux
QA Contact:
Complexity:
Smash Test:
Verified:
No
Verification Required:
No
Sprint:

Description

This repo is called pulp-selinux, but it really contains the policy for Pulp3 aka pulpcore, so I personally would have expected it to be called pulpcore-selinux.

Additionally, there is a pulp-selinux RPM package, built from the pulp2 source, so we'll have to rename this during packaging anyways as otherwise we end up with two packages with the same name.

Associated revisions

Revision 14144682 View on GitHub
Added by bmbouter about 1 month ago

Renames policy from 'pulp' to 'pulpcore'

https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5994 re #5994

Revision c57e58b8 View on GitHub
Added by bmbouter 26 days ago

Rename pulp_port to pulpcore_port for clarity

Also add some uninstall docs.

https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5994 closes #5994

History

#1 Updated by bmbouter about 1 month ago

  • Tags Katello-P2 added

Adding P2 label to identify the work priority w.r.t. Katello.

#2 Updated by fabricio.aguiar about 1 month ago

  • Triaged changed from No to Yes

#3 Updated by bmbouter about 1 month ago

  • Status changed from NEW to ASSIGNED
  • Assignee set to bmbouter

@evgeni I've renamed the pulp-selinux to pulpcore-selinux and notified pulp-dev here

Besides renaming the repository, was there more to do? Does the policy name conflict with pulp2 and we need to do something about that also?

#4 Updated by evgeni about 1 month ago

I would prefer if the files would also be called pulpcore.fc etc, not pulp.fc etc, but that's not strictly a requirement as the files in the old pulp2 policy are called pulp-COMPONENT.fc etc.

On January 21, 2020 6:54:05 PM UTC, Pulp <> wrote:

#5 Updated by evgeni about 1 month ago

But to your question, for consistency, I'd also rename the policy itself, yeah.

On January 21, 2020 6:54:05 PM UTC, Pulp <> wrote:

#6 Updated by bmbouter about 1 month ago

  • Status changed from ASSIGNED to POST

#7 Updated by bmbouter about 1 month ago

@evgeni

The policy itself is now also renamed to pulpcore. What about the pulp_port label here: https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore-selinux/blob/master/pulp_port.te

Should that be pulpcore_port instead? I don't have an opinion.

#8 Updated by evgeni about 1 month ago

I guess it's more clear for the users if that's also called pulpcore_port.

On January 22, 2020 9:01:31 PM UTC, Pulp <> wrote:

#9 Updated by bmbouter about 1 month ago

Renaming pulp_port to pulpcore_port for clarity in last PR: https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore-selinux/pull/10

#10 Updated by bmbouter 26 days ago

  • Status changed from POST to MODIFIED

#11 Updated by bmbouter 26 days ago

  • Status changed from MODIFIED to CLOSED - CURRENTRELEASE

The last PR got completed, so now all the names use pulpcore. I'm moving to CLOSED. Please let me know what else can be improved.

Please register to edit this issue

Also available in: Atom PDF