Bug 137654
Summary: | kernel-doc listed as both added and removed | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Alexandre Oliva <oliva> |
Component: | fedora-release | Assignee: | Ed Bailey <ed> |
Status: | CLOSED DEFERRED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | sopwith, wtogami |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2004-10-30 18:16:03 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 114398 |
Description
Alexandre Oliva
2004-10-30 02:11:46 UTC
The kernel-doc problem uncovered a bug in the python script I used to generate the lists. What caused it was that the kernel-doc packages in FC2 were arch-specific binary RPMs, while the kernel-doc packages in FC3 are now noarch RPMs. So from one perspective, the package lists are correct -- the i386 kernel-doc package in FC2 was removed, and a noarch kernel-doc package was added. But I agree that the result is confusing. An interesting corner case; I wonder how best to address it... :-) For the sake if keeping the release notes sources consistent on the chance the content may be reused for FC4, I've conditionalized the reference to memtest86 to only apply to x86. And since I was in the neighborhood, I've pulled the references to kernel-doc from the added and deleted package lists. Whether or not this will make it into the actual release is up to Sopwith; this is *way* late to be rebuilding fedora-release... |