[Bug 314911] Review Request: tuncfg - Userspace TUN/TAP configuration utility

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: tuncfg - Userspace TUN/TAP configuration utility


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=314911





------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com  2007-10-24 09:21 EST -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> The clear statement is for GPL2.  That's in the source, but not in tuncfg.c, 
> so may have been overlooked.  

Yes, but there is no clear statement in any attached documentation, the only
reference to the license is for the kernel module, which is not linked to tuncfg
at all. Which is why we need the copyright holder (is that you?) to say that it
is GPL (or preferrably, to re-release the source with the header license
attribution included in tuncfg.c).

> The specfile, as attached, doesn't use %dist; probably because the %dist crutch
> doesn't appear in all distros for which the project may be packaged, and really
> assumes a rebuilding user dumb enough to need %builddeps but smart enough to
> activate the magic crutch anyway if the specfile can't cope.

You really don't understand what we're doing here, sir. ;)

%{?dist} will be undefined on distros/environments where it does not appear/is
not defined, and thus, will not affect anything.

In this specific package, %{?dist} isn't being used to conditionalize anything
(and even if it was, our guidelines specifically require its use in such a way
that it will not error out if it is unset). I'm recommending its use so that the
packager doesn't accidentally end up with two packages with the same N-V-R in
two different branches.

Please take a moment and read: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.