Package Details: libselinux 3.8-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/libselinux.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: libselinux
Description: SELinux library and simple utilities
Upstream URL: https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux
Keywords: selinux
Licenses: custom
Groups: selinux
Conflicts: selinux-usr-libselinux
Provides: libselinux.so, selinux-usr-libselinux
Submitter: Siosm
Maintainer: IooNag
Last Packager: IooNag
Votes: 135
Popularity: 2.08
First Submitted: 2013-11-03 20:05 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-03-02 20:33 (UTC)

Dependencies (11)

Sources (3)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last »

tallero commented on 2020-02-11 22:17 (UTC)

@IooNag: I know of Python 2.x EOL; the library (same tar of this package) can still produce 2.x bindings. The software that needs it is system-config-users, the users/groups GUI manager included in Red Hat/CentOS 7.x.

I just noticed gnome-system-tools.

IooNag commented on 2020-02-11 19:41 (UTC)

tallero: Python 2 is no longer supported by SELinux userspace tools and libraries, since commit https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux/commit/214cb61d539f75e5290928cb7bba5b2646632d0b that is included in release 3.0. This is why I removed Python 2 library from libselinux package.

What software are you using that requires Python 2's bindings of libselinux? This software needs be updated to Python 3 compatibility anyway, as Python 2 is no longer updated "even if someone finds a security problem in it" (cf. https://www.python.org/doc/sunset-python-2/).

tallero commented on 2020-02-11 18:09 (UTC)

I forked the package to build and install only python 2.x bindings in libselinux-python2. Could you add the option to build them into this one so that I can drop the newborn depedency?

IooNag commented on 2020-01-12 16:34 (UTC)

paperfolder: As far as I understand, this warning appears for every package that provides a Python library. If you know of a way to bytecode-compile Python scripts without introducing the full path of the scripts in the resulting .pyc files, I will gladly modify the PKGBUILD accordingly.

paperfolder commented on 2020-01-10 15:59 (UTC) (edited on 2020-01-10 16:03 (UTC) by paperfolder)

makepkg returns a warning that the built package contains a reference to $pkgdir - is this a problem during compiling? (archwiki says that this error means the literal string $pkgdir is contained in these files)

==> WARNING: Package contains reference to $pkgdir
usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/selinux/__pycache__/__init__.cpython-38.opt-1.pyc
usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/selinux/__pycache__/__init__.cpython-38.pyc

xuanwo commented on 2019-11-22 05:37 (UTC)

Please bump a pkgrel for python 3.8 rebuild~

IooNag commented on 2019-08-24 15:54 (UTC)

reallygrimm: which compiler are you using? The build does not fail with gcc 9.1.0-2 on x86-64, but people on Fedora has reported issues upstreams with gcc 9.1.1 that got fixed by commit https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux/commit/ee8f7a870c625de139aa271eae0c40578488c2f6 . I will backport this patch to the package.

reallygrimm commented on 2019-08-23 17:04 (UTC) (edited on 2019-08-23 17:06 (UTC) by reallygrimm)

I'm getting a build failure, and I'm not sure if it's the patch, upstream or because I've got blinders on.

booleans.c:39:5: error: assuming signed overflow does not occur when changing X +- C1 cmp C2 to X cmp C2 -+ C1 [-Werror=strict-overflow]

39 | int security_get_boolean_names(char ***names, int *len)

IooNag commented on 2019-06-23 15:44 (UTC)

iGwadaa: I forgot that Makefile in the source directory overwrote definitions from src/Makefile... This Makefile overwrites PCRE_LDLIBS with "PCRE_LDLIBS := $(shell $(PKG_CONFIG) --libs $(PCRE_MODULE))". Do you have pkg-config command (from package pkgconf)? As it is part of base-devel group, it is supposed to be installed even though it is not listed in the dependencies of libselinux's PKGBUILD.

IooNag commented on 2019-06-23 15:40 (UTC)

iGwadaa: libselinux builds fine on my clean environment. pcre_fullinfo is provided by /usr/lib/libpcre.so.1.2.11 from pcre 8.43-1. Moreover the Makefile in src/ adds -lpcre (through an indirection with "PCRE_LDLIBS ?= -lpcre"). Do you know of something specific to your build environment that would explain this build failure?

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last »