restorecon vs. setfiles

[Aleksey Nogin]

On 18.05.2004 19:22, Gary Peck wrote:

> For some reason restorecon and setfiles have different notions of what
> context certain files should be. For example:
[...]
> So, restorecon thinks that *.so files should be shlib_t, whereas
> setfiles thinks they should be lib_t. Which one is right and why do they
> disagree? I thought that they both get their context info from the same
> place.

It seems the two disagree on symlinks. May be restorecon forgets to 
check whether its argument is a symlink?

-- 
Aleksey Nogin

Home Page: http://nogin.org/
E-Mail: nogin at cs.caltech.edu (office), aleksey at nogin.org (personal)
Office: Jorgensen 70, tel: (626) 395-2907