Bug 226199

Summary: Merge Review: nhpf
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: me
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: 2010-02-24 08:18:49 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it 2007-01-31 20:16:48 UTC
Fedora Merge Review: nhpf

http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/nhpf/
Initial Owner: cchance@redhat.com

Comment 1 Ville Skyttä 2007-03-03 12:27:15 UTC
Built without $RPM_OPT_FLAGS.  One way to fix it is 'make
CFLAG="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"' instead of 'make' in %build (note CFLAG, not CFLAGS).

URL points to a "this page has moved" page, and where it's moved to doesn't look
too useful.  Any better one available?

"Distributable" as a license is frowned upon, but I'm not sure what else to put
there in this case.  nhpf.c does contain the license text, it looks pretty much
like BSD but isn't quite the same.  Perhaps it's close enough to use "BSDish"
instead of "Distributable".  Anyway, it'd be nice to have the license text
available in the binary packages.

I'm not able to log into the Source0 FTP server to verify sources nor do I
actually have much clue at all what this package is about so I'll leave rest of
the review to someone else.

Comment 2 Caius Chance 2010-02-24 08:18:49 UTC
This is a dead package. Closing this bug.

Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2010-02-25 01:53:07 UTC
Please stop changing the summaries on merge reviews.