Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

>btw i didn't see an acknowledgement from the person who sent the
>last udev patch (dan was it you?)
>
>the use of the "mode" argument it is clear has not been used,
>to call i think it was matchpathcon.
>
>instead, because i had three near-identical code portions all
>of which had different S_IFXXX thingies, dan-i-think-it-was
>moved the near-identical code into a function with a "mode"
>argument...
>
>... and forgot to use the "mode" argument such that matchpathcon
>is called with S_IFDIR.
>
>given that i haven't seen an acknowledgement of this issue
>either in my inbox or on the mailing lists (which i am checking
>manually) i thought it best to hassle people until i know it's
>been spotted.
>
>this is IMPORTANT because it will impact the contexts on
>inodes and stuff created in /dev: the "optimising" argument
>"mode" passed to matchpathcon and setfscreatecon, if wrong,
>results in relevant (and correct!) file_context entries being
>skipped!
>
>l.
>
>On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 05:37:17PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
>
>  
>
>>On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 04:29, Tom London <selinux@comcast.net> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Newest Rawhide updates (including udev-030-10, mkinitrd-4.1.8-1,
>>>kernel-2.6.8-1.532, and selinux-policy-strict-1.17.5-2)
>>>now boots in strict/enforcing.
>>>      
>>>
>>I've attached a diff against the CVS policy as well as the .te and .fc files 
>>for udev changes which fix this and address some other issues as well.
>>    
>>
>--
>fedora-selinux-list mailing list
>fedora-selinux-list@redhat.com
>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list
>  
>
Yes it was me and I modified out udev rpm, but I guess I never 
responded.  Sorry about that.

Luke thanks for the fix.

Dan