Bug 187196
Summary: | Review Request: kernel-module-rt2500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Kyle Yencer <kyle> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | caolanm, davidf, eric.tanguy, gauret, kevin |
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: | 2007-01-25 16:12:06 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: |
Description
Kyle Yencer
2006-03-29 04:26:01 UTC
Please see thinkpad-kmod, thinkpad-kmod-common, lirc-kmod and lirc-kmod-common in Extras CVS (devel branch) [1] and bug 177583, bug 177584 for how kernel modules should be packaged in Extras. [1] http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/?root=extras Updated SPEC to fit design, please re-review. Spec Name or Url: rt2500-kmod.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://files.yencer.net/pub/fedora/extras/4/SRPMS/rt2500-kmod-2006032818-1.2.6.15_1.1833_FC4.src.rpm Description: RT2500 kernel modules Just to clarify, I don't have hardware to test this with, so I'm not really planning to participate more in the review. I have the hardware, I will test and post results. No news ? Actual module built successfully for me with this on FC4 with kernel 2.6.17_1.2142_FC4, i686, no smp Couldn't build as non-root user as make install does /sbin/depmod -a and also installs directly into /lib/modules - DESTDIR apparently doing nothing tried to fix it up, then discovered bug 202528 and bug 202529 These are much more up to date and correct and build successfully, so this bug should probably be marked as a duplicated of them... Kyle: Any news? Would you be willing to close this in favor of the more up to date 202528 submission? Closing due to lack of response in a reasonable length of time. If you have an updated package for submission, please open a new ticket. |