Bug 2150545
| Summary: | Review Request: xtideuniversalbios - XTIDE Universal BIOS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Davide Cavalca <davide> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Neal Gompa <ngompa13> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | ngompa13, package-review |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | ngompa13:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2022-12-05 16:49:26 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: | 2150546, 2150547 | ||
|
Description
Davide Cavalca
2022-12-03 22:29:59 UTC
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94897231 Open to suggestions for a better filesystem location for this, I'm not sure if %{_datadir} is the right place for x86 BIOS extensions and DOS binaries.
Taking this review. (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #2) > Open to suggestions for a better filesystem location for this, I'm not sure > if %{_datadir} is the right place for x86 BIOS extensions and DOS binaries. Normally, foreign platform binaries need a dedicated hierarchy, but in this case, I don't think it's not worth worrying about. (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4) > (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #2) > > Open to suggestions for a better filesystem location for this, I'm not sure > > if %{_datadir} is the right place for x86 BIOS extensions and DOS binaries. > > Normally, foreign platform binaries need a dedicated hierarchy, but in this > case, I don't think it's not worth worrying about. Blech, I mean it's not worth worrying about. Also, I've been poking through the source tree, and it seems like this is actually GPLv2+, rather than GPLv2... You're right, the actual text the include is GPLv2, but a large part of the files have GPLv2+ headers. Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/xtideuniversalbios/xtideuniversalbios.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/xtideuniversalbios/xtideuniversalbios-2.0.0^20221002svn624-1.fc38.src.rpm Changelog: - update license tag Review notes: * Package is named appropriately * Licensing is correctly noted and license files are installed * Package dependencies look sane * No serious errors from rpmlint PACKAGE APPROVED. (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xtideuniversalbios FEDORA-2022-3d2cd12a8d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-3d2cd12a8d FEDORA-2022-3d2cd12a8d has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. FEDORA-2022-0b5746bee3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-0b5746bee3 FEDORA-2022-0b5746bee3 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-0b5746bee3 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-0b5746bee3 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-2022-0b5746bee3 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. |