rawhide report: 20070327 changes

[Richard Hughes]

On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 10:16 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 11:08 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 06:03 -0400, buildsys at redhat.com wrote:
> > > hal-0.5.9-0.git20070326.fc7
> > > ---------------------------
> > > * Mon Mar 26 2007 David Zeuthen <davidz at redhat.com> -
> > > 0.5.9-0.git20070326
> > > - Update to hal 0.5.9rc2 and hal-info-20070326
> > 
> > These *need* to be split into separate SRPMS. I don't mind
> > co-maintaining these if you want, but if we are updating machine quirks
> > once a month or so, then we should be able to update one 100k no-arch
> > package, rather than 4 or 5 multi-megabyte architecture specific
> > packages.
> > 
> > Sorry to harp on about this, but F7T3 is getting closer.
> 
> One, this bug is not a feature and that's why I've been punting it since
> I'd rather spend my time getting features done before feature freeze.

Ahh, I figured it was a new feature, apologies.

> Second, the hal and hal-info tarballs needed fixing
>  http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/hal/2007-March/007799.html

Yes agreed, cheers for doing this.

> to actually sanely do this. Third, I'd be happy to see you co-maintain
> the hal-info package and I think I even suggested you should submit the
> hal-info SRPM for Fedora Extras. If it's in Extras already, it's simpler
> to do the switch once the merge is complete. HAL will need a rebuild
> _anyway_ to take advantage of libsmbios for backlight and rfkill on Dell
> laptops.

Sure, I do enough shouting on this list to put my money where my mouth
is... ;-) I'll happily co-maintain hal-info. I'll read up on how to do
so tonight.

Richard.