[Bug 188974] Review Request: libGLw

[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: libGLw


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188974





------- Additional Comments From ajackson at redhat.com  2006-04-14 11:08 EST -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> * the non free file shouldn't be distributed. what I do in such 
> cases is provide with a script in SourceXX that unpack the upstream 
> tarball, remove the offending files and repack, such that a reviewer 
> can easily reproduce what you did in the SOURCES directory. An example 
> where I do that is grads (with the script grads-remove-files and the 
> list of files grads-removed-files-list) although you could do more simply
> since you only have one file to remove.

That feels like such overkill.  I'll give it a shot though.

> * I am not convinced that it is right to make a source package out of a 
> whole package by taking only bits of what is in the tarball while the 
> remaining is in another source package. May be worth asking on the extras
> list. Couldn't the upstream project be convinced to split the tarball?

No, they can't.  This battle has been fought and lost before.  We already slice
up the default build of Mesa, since we don't use its libglut for being non-free.

Other changes applied, along with some fixed %package statements to make the
binary rpm not be named libGLw-libGLw-*.  New versions uploaded to the same URLs
as before.

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