[Bug 210007] Review Request: libtune - standard API to access the kernel tunables

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Aug 31 13:16:15 UTC 2007


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: libtune - standard API to access the kernel tunables


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=210007





------- Additional Comments From nadia.derbey at bull.net  2007-08-31 09:16 EST -------
1) variables:
The %{distro_string} is used too.
Since it is built from the %{family} and %{release} variables, we can say they
are all used.

2) base_kernel:
uname -r would give me something like "2.6.21-1.3194.fc7", while I only need the
first 3 fields of it: "2.6.21"

3) kernel required:
Don't need to require the exact kernel, since several releases are supported,
starting from 2.6.9. Actually, I want to avoid changing my spec file each time
the kernel changes. That's why I'm extracting the running kernel release.

4) Licensing:
Fixed - But rpmlint should be fixed accordingly: it is now telling me my License
string is invalid. May be there was another version released after license
guidelines has changed?

5) dot
Whish one are you talking about?
Couldn't find anything about dots in 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-ef67b32cfe3903b0aaab1b3c920940769007da6a

6) distro_string:
I actually only changed it in the tunables-distro-data description.
The problem is that anyewhere else, the "FC7" string is used instead of f7. So I
would have to change things upstream.
But if it is really a problem, please tell me and I'll do the changes, since I
am the upstream.

SPEC URL: http://www.bullopensource.org/libtune/libtune-0.12-4/libtune.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.bullopensource.org/libtune/libtune-0.12-4/libtune-0.12-4.fc7.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.




More information about the package-review mailing list