[Bug 451095] libcxgb3 hardware driver

[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: libcxgb3 hardware driver


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451095


ed at eh3.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |ed at eh3.com
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com  2008-06-28 11:53 EST -------
Here's a quick review:

GOOD:
+ source matches upstream SHA1SUM:
    4aa38c77c42ebbd07d724f2df6cf2e108af03c8d  libcxgb3-1.2.1.tar.gz
    4aa38c77c42ebbd07d724f2df6cf2e108af03c8d  libcxgb3-1.2.1.tar.gz.UP
+ license is correct and correctly included in the main package
+ specfile looks clean and macros sane
+ *.la files are removed
+ builds in mock F8 x86_64
+ rpmlint reports:
    libcxgb3.src:12: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes %{name}-devel
    libcxgb3.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/modprobe.d/libcxgb3.conf
    libcxgb3.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/libibverbs.d/cxgb3.driver
    libcxgb3.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided libcxgb3-devel
    libcxgb3-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation
+ dir ownership looks good
+ permissions look good


I think the "Obsoletes: %{name}-devel" is harmless.  If, as Doug points 
out, it helps users upgrade from upstream/3rd-party RPMs then I'd like 
to allow it.

I don't see any blockers here so its 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, or are watching someone who is.