[Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod

[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: zaptel-kmod


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583





------- Additional Comments From fedora at leemhuis.info  2006-05-26 02:40 EST -------
(In reply to comment #33)
> So, is the kernel module setup finalized in fedora extras now? 
> Or still in flux?

I suppose there will be changes required in the future (some approaching in the
next days), but consider it ready to use. But maintainers of kmod-packages
should be prepared that they need to adjust things now and them to some new
developments.

http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/KernelModules

> kmodtool 0.10.10 is out if you want to update to that. 
> Should there be a kmodtool package that the other kernel packages BuildRequire:
> instead of including it in each kernel module package?

No. It should either be in the SRPM or in redhat-rpm-macros. Shipping it
stand-alone will lead to problems.

> I was able to build this package in mock, but only for the exact kernel on my
> development machine and with just it's exact arch.

Then there is probalby something wrong in the spec.

> Can mock be used to build
> kmod packages?

Yes. Luvna does it already for some weeks.

>If so, how should it be called? 

No special handling should be needed.
> I'd be happy to review this package provided the specs are finalized now... 

http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/KernelModules

> (or perhaps one of the folks that wrote the kmodtool would be interested in
> making this a test case...)

lirc-kmod and thinkpad-kmod should show how it's done properly.

-- 
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.