[Bug 458826] Review Request: s390utils - Linux/390 specific utilities

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458826


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #10 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-03-25 19:44:19 EDT ---
I don't think there is anything else I can reasonably check.  I didn't paste in
a run through my usual checklist but I did look over everything that I could
actually check.

There's one issue I see, which I don't think is major: the license on the
metapackage is a bit confusing, because it only contains a single text file
which isn't itself "GPLv2 and GPLv2+ and CPL".  I don't really know what's
appropriate, but I don't think that using the union of the licenses of the
packages that will be pulled in is any worse than saying "Public Domain" or
whatever.

There's also the interesting question of whether LD_PRELOAD is considered
"linking" and how that intersects with the incompatibility of the CPL with
other licenses.  I don't think it matters for this package because, among the
binaries included in this package, there's no GPL/CPL linking going on as far
as I can tell.

Anyway, this package looks vastly better than the original, and I don't see
anything else to complain about.  Thanks for your patience.

APPROVED

-- 
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.