FC 8 re-install
Terry - Fedora Core
fastsnip-fedora at yahoo.com
Thu Feb 7 21:21:25 UTC 2008
Terry - Fedora Core wrote:
> Finally gave up on my first install of FC 8 and did a second install.
> Since This was the second time around, I knew what to look for and
> wasn't as nervous and checked out ALL of the options. Found out that I
> pretty much did everything right the first time around. The only thing
> I did differently this time was to customize the packages installed.
> This allowed me to install KDE right up front instead of having to do
> so afterwards. Also got to check out other packages for initial
> installation. That was the only thing that I did diferently. As I
> said, Ihad done everything right the first time around.
>
> This reminded me of FC 5 - I had to install FC 5 3 or 4 times to get a
> good installation or at least a workable installation. On FC 5 I ended
> up doing 95% of new program installs and upgrades from source because
> the rpm program continually corrupted its own database.
>
> What I did like about the FC installation process - I CAN install
> everything right at the beginning instead of having to do so piece by
> piece as I discover I need it and then need to spend hours searching
> through documentation trying to find out which package is needed and
> where to get it. Getting everything right up front is a lot better and
> considerably less frustrating.
>
> What I didn't like about the installation process - after I marked
> everything I wanted for installation, a window opens and says that the
> installation is starting and that this could "take a few minutes". The
> few minutes turned into 35 minutes using a high speed DSL network
> connection at over 3 mb/sec. Now I'm not complaining about the 35
> minutes, what really bothered me was wondering for 35 minutes if the
> process had hung. A little visual feedback at that point would really,
> really be appreciated. If the initialization process takes only "a few
> minutes" then the feedback wouldn't be there long, but 35 minutes is a
> long time to be left hanging and wondering and wondering and wondering
> .........
>
> After the reboot, a notification came up and said that xxx security
> updates needed to be done. I decided not to do that immediately. I
> first used the "add/remove software" program (pirut??) to download and
> install "apcupsd". Then remembered gnucash, Booted the program again
> and tried to install gnucash. Everything worked fine until it came
> time to download the packages. The downloading process hung. After 20
> minutes, I tried to close the window and was informed that the process
> was not responding and so I "terminated" the process. Tried again and
> after a some time a window opened and informed me that the process had
> encountered a fatal error. I clicked on the "save" button to save the
> information to a file to send to bugzilla, but could never find the
> file to send. Don't think a file was ever created with the information
> to send.
>
> Then tried to apply the security updates. Same thing happened. So the
> updating and add/remove program is hanging and never completing.
>
> This is probably "pirut" for both???
>
> I tried to log out. KDE would not do so. Bring up the log out dialog,
> click on "logout" and nothing happens. Everything is still running. I
> can change desktops and activate programs, just could not logout.
> Tried multiple times - same result.
>
> Finally had to hit the hardware reset button.
>
> KDE logout worked after the h/w reboot, but the program to update
> things still hangs.
>
> Is there anyway to get program update and add/remove s/w to complete??
>
> Should I re-install pirut??
>
> If so how do I go about doing that. I can use the command line and
> have done so for over 20 years, but am not an expert on programs that
> I only need every 5 or 10 years.
>
Ok - I don't know exactly what is happening, but there are a few details
I totally forgot about above dealing with SELinux. I forgot simply
because the error messages said to notify my System Administrator and
since I am that person and since I was/am totally ignorant about what
the error messages were talking about, I disregarded - probably should
not have, but I didn't have the time to spend hours learning at the
time. So I totally forgot about the messages.
The error messages were something about gdm and requested services
denied. After that I could no longer access any hard drives.
Also, I when I was able to log out, I got a black screen and a window
popped up that the X Window system could not access something or other
and that 'gd' (there's that gdm again) was involved. Had to do a
three-fingered salute to re-boot the machine.
Had an idea as I was going to sleep last night and remembered it this
morning. Booted Fedora and looked for SELinux. Found it. First opened
the troubleshooting window. There are 4 trouble reports there. I have
copied the reports below for anybody that knows enough to decipher them.
I then opened the SELinux manager. Tried to disable SELinux and got a
dire warning about having to reboot and if I wanted to turn it back on I
would have to relabel hard disks and that I should change to "permissive
mode" instead. That stopped me and I canceled the action and switched to
"permissive mode".
then executed:
su -c 'yum update'
on the command line. That command had quit with the journal io error before.
With SELinux set to permissive mode, the yum update went to completion.
Informed me that 453 packages needed to be updated and 20 installed with
a total download of 870 M. Answered 'y' and download commenced.
The first download had caused the previous journal io error after 25%
of the first package had downloaded. So I waited with baited breath
until the download got to 40% then 50% and then was confident that the
update would go to completion.
The download completed, then the testing and then the actual update:
894 packages/files updated.
It took as long to update as it did to download.
All in all the whole process took about 4 to 5 hours. I totally refuse
to think how long the download would have taken on my old dial-up line.
Of course, the update process would still have taken the same time.
So here are the SELinux error reports:
Summary SELinux is preventing gdm (xdm_t) "execute" to <Unknown>
(rpm_exec_t). Detailed Description SELinux denied access requested by
gdm. It is not expected that this access is required by gdm and this
access may signal an intrusion attempt. It is also possible that the
specific version or configuration of the application is causing it to
require additional access. Allowing Access Sometimes labeling problems
can cause SELinux denials. You could try to restore the default system
file context for <Unknown>, restorecon -v <Unknown> If this does not
work, there is currently no automatic way to allow this access. Instead,
you can generate a local policy module to allow this access - see
http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq-fc5/#id2961385 Or you can
disable SELinux protection altogether. Disabling SELinux protection is
not recommended. Please file a
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi against this package.
Additional Information Source Context Target Context Target Objects
Affected RPM Packages Policy RPM Selinux Enabled Policy Type MLS Enabled
Enforcing Mode Plugin Name Host Name Platform Alert Count First Seen
Last Seen Local ID Line Numbers Raw Audit Messages avc: denied { execute
} for comm=gdm dev=sda7 name=rpm pid=3107
scontext=system_u:system_r:xdm_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 tclass=file
tcontext=system_u:object_r:rpm_exec_t:s0
system_u:system_r:xdm_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 system_u:object_r:rpm_exec_t:s0
None [ file ] selinux-policy-3.0.8-44.fc8 True targeted True Enforcing
plugins.catchall_file Home-Net Linux Home-Net 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 #1 SMP Tue
Oct 30 13:55:12 EDT 2007 i686 i686 7 Wed 06 Feb 2008 01:50:35 PM EST Thu
07 Feb 2008 10:26:00 AM EST 41e3c4c1-b5da-4c6a-8917-01b4013c448f
Summary SELinux is preventing gdm (xdm_t) "getattr" to /bin/rpm
(rpm_exec_t). Detailed Description SELinux denied access requested by
gdm. It is not expected that this access is required by gdm and this
access may signal an intrusion attempt. It is also possible that the
specific version or configuration of the application is causing it to
require additional access. Allowing Access Sometimes labeling problems
can cause SELinux denials. You could try to restore the default system
file context for /bin/rpm, restorecon -v /bin/rpm If this does not work,
there is currently no automatic way to allow this access. Instead, you
can generate a local policy module to allow this access - see
http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq-fc5/#id2961385 Or you can
disable SELinux protection altogether. Disabling SELinux protection is
not recommended. Please file a
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi against this package.
Additional Information Source Context Target Context Target Objects
Affected RPM Packages Policy RPM Selinux Enabled Policy Type MLS Enabled
Enforcing Mode Plugin Name Host Name Platform Alert Count First Seen
Last Seen Local ID Line Numbers Raw Audit Messages avc: denied { getattr
} for comm=gdm dev=sda7 egid=0 euid=0 exe=/bin/bash exit=-13 fsgid=0
fsuid=0 gid=0 items=0 path=/bin/rpm pid=3107
scontext=system_u:system_r:xdm_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 sgid=0
subj=system_u:system_r:xdm_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 suid=0 tclass=file
tcontext=system_u:object_r:rpm_exec_t:s0 tty=(none) uid=0
system_u:system_r:xdm_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 system_u:object_r:rpm_exec_t:s0
/bin/rpm [ file ] rpm-4.4.2.2-3.fc8 [target] selinux-policy-3.0.8-44.fc8
True targeted True Enforcing plugins.catchall_file Home-Net Linux
Home-Net 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 #1 SMP Tue Oct 30 13:55:12 EDT 2007 i686 i686
13 Wed 06 Feb 2008 01:50:35 PM EST Thu 07 Feb 2008 10:26:00 AM EST
845ddb2e-69a4-6f67-5508-83456c0bff19
Summary SELinux is preventing sh (loadkeys_t) "search" to <Unknown>
(home_root_t). Detailed Description SELinux denied access requested by
sh. It is not expected that this access is required by sh and this
access may signal an intrusion attempt. It is also possible that the
specific version or configuration of the application is causing it to
require additional access. Allowing Access Sometimes labeling problems
can cause SELinux denials. You could try to restore the default system
file context for <Unknown>, restorecon -v <Unknown> If this does not
work, there is currently no automatic way to allow this access. Instead,
you can generate a local policy module to allow this access - see
http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq-fc5/#id2961385 Or you can
disable SELinux protection altogether. Disabling SELinux protection is
not recommended. Please file a
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi against this package.
Additional Information Source Context Target Context Target Objects
Affected RPM Packages Policy RPM Selinux Enabled Policy Type MLS Enabled
Enforcing Mode Plugin Name Host Name Platform Alert Count First Seen
Last Seen Local ID Line Numbers Raw Audit Messages avc: denied { search
} for comm=sh dev=sda7 egid=0 euid=0 exe=/bin/bash exit=-13 fsgid=0
fsuid=0 gid=0 items=0 name=home pid=4986
scontext=system_u:system_r:loadkeys_t:s0 sgid=0
subj=system_u:system_r:loadkeys_t:s0 suid=0 tclass=dir
tcontext=system_u:object_r:home_root_t:s0 tty=(none) uid=0
system_u:system_r:loadkeys_t:s0 system_u:object_r:home_root_t:s0 None [
dir ] selinux-policy-3.0.8-44.fc8 True targeted True Enforcing
plugins.catchall_file Home-Net Linux Home-Net 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 #1 SMP Tue
Oct 30 13:55:12 EDT 2007 i686 i686 2 Wed 06 Feb 2008 04:52:48 PM EST Wed
06 Feb 2008 04:52:48 PM EST 54a23c38-b925-4467-aa0e-5d3fdcc5d799
Summary SELinux is preventing sh (loadkeys_t) "search" to <Unknown>
(unconfined_home_dir_t). Detailed Description SELinux denied access
requested by sh. It is not expected that this access is required by sh
and this access may signal an intrusion attempt. It is also possible
that the specific version or configuration of the application is causing
it to require additional access. Allowing Access Sometimes labeling
problems can cause SELinux denials. You could try to restore the default
system file context for <Unknown>, restorecon -v <Unknown> If this does
not work, there is currently no automatic way to allow this access.
Instead, you can generate a local policy module to allow this access -
see http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq-fc5/#id2961385 Or you can
disable SELinux protection altogether. Disabling SELinux protection is
not recommended. Please file a
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi against this package.
Additional Information Source Context Target Context Target Objects
Affected RPM Packages Policy RPM Selinux Enabled Policy Type MLS Enabled
Enforcing Mode Plugin Name Host Name Platform Alert Count First Seen
Last Seen Local ID Line Numbers Raw Audit Messages avc: denied { search
} for comm=sh dev=sda7 name=terry pid=4986
scontext=system_u:system_r:loadkeys_t:s0 tclass=dir
tcontext=unconfined_u:object_r:unconfined_home_dir_t:s0
system_u:system_r:loadkeys_t:s0
unconfined_u:object_r:unconfined_home_dir_t:s0 None [ dir ]
selinux-policy-3.0.8-44.fc8 True targeted True Enforcing
plugins.catchall_file Home-Net Linux Home-Net 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 #1 SMP Tue
Oct 30 13:55:12 EDT 2007 i686 i686 22 Wed 06 Feb 2008 04:52:48 PM EST
Wed 06 Feb 2008 04:52:48 PM EST 04bec695-038f-408d-bf7a-fa3c5f6e2812
They mean little to nothing to me. Maybe they will prove worthwhile to
somebody that knows about SELinux.
I just find it more than strange that the default SELinux settings would
caused such trouble and lock me out of using the computer. I just hope
that the above error reports can prevent the same from happening to
somebody else in the future.
Terry
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list