[Freeipa-devel] [PATCHES] 0633-0634 Move setting SELinux booleans to platform code; Set SELinux booleans when restoring

[Martin Kosek]

On 09/25/2014 11:34 AM, thierry bordaz wrote:
> On 09/25/2014 10:58 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> On 09/24/2014 06:02 PM, thierry bordaz wrote:
>>> On 08/15/2014 10:40 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>>>> A fix for https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4157
>>>>
>>>> This depends on my patches 0631-0632 (for backup/restore integration
>>>> tests).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Our setsebool code was repeated a few times. Instead of adding another
>>>> copy, I refactored what we have into a platform task.
>>>> I fixed two old setsebool tickets while I was at it:
>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2519
>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2934
>>>>
>>>> Since ipaplatform should not depend on ipalib, and I needed a new
>>>> exception type, I added a new module, ipapython.errors. This might not
>>>> be the best name, since it could be confused with ipalib.errors.
>>>> Opinions welcome.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As for the second patch: ideally, rather than what I do with `if
>>>> 'ADTRUST' in self.backup_services`, we'd get the list of booleans
>>>> directly from the *instance modules, or even tell the individual
>>>> services to restore themselves. But, that refactoring looks like too
>>>> much to do now.
>>
>> Filed easyfix: https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4571
>>
>>
>>> The first patch looks good to me. Just a minor comment. The test and run
>>> of 'paths.SELINUXENABLED' is present several times in tasks.py and
>>> fedora. Does it worth to refactor it ?
>>>
>>> About the second patch, something I do not understand.
>>> restore_selinux_booleans resets the selinux boolean to the values that
>>> are taken from SELINUX_BOOLEAN_SETTINGS in the instance (http/ad) . Does
>>> that mean this dict has been updated with the original values (using
>>> 'backup_func' in set_selinux_booleans ?).
>>
>> This is restoring an IPA installation, not restoring the system to a pre-IPA
>> state.
>> The settings need to be the same as if IPA was being installed.
>>
>>
> OK thanks for the explanation.

Is this an ACK?

Martin