On Sat, 2005-04-09 at 08:27 +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Thanks for the responses to my email the other day.

Hmmm...did you get a response? I think that the ramfs security xattr patches weren't upstreamed because there wasn't a real demand for them at the time, unlike the tmpfs security xattr support.

> I've made further progress, such that I now know that the labels are
> properly stored and accessible through the getfattr command, but not
> through getfilecon.
>
> I added printks to the kernel, and see them activated in the case of
> getfattr, but not for getfilecon. The return code that getfilecon
> received back from its getxattr call is -1.

And what errno? What does an strace should in terms of the actual arguments passed to getxattr(2) by getfattr vs. getfilecon? Different sized buffers?

> I can keep working through this myself, but if someone knows the answer
> offhand, I'd really appreciate hearing it.

-- 
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
National Security Agency


--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.