Bug 226511

Summary: Merge Review: unifdef
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: David Woodhouse <dwmw2>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: jonathan.underwood, redhat-bugzilla, wtogami
Target Milestone: ---Flags: wtogami: fedora-review+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-12-28 23:34:07 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 21:12:54 UTC
Fedora Merge Review: unifdef

Initial Owner: dwmw2@redhat.com

Comment 1 Warren Togami 2007-02-01 19:07:27 UTC
APPROVED due to previous reviews in Bug #190362 and Bug #189937

(ASSIGNED to owner, deal with this only after the new buildsys is up)

Comment 2 Jonathan Underwood 2007-02-09 10:53:14 UTC
I wonder if you still think there's a need to include an unifdef package when
sunifdef is available currently in Extras (packaged by me) - sunifdef is
effectively upstream now, since unifdef hasn't been maintained for a while. 

"Sunifdef is a commandline tool for eliminating superfluous preprocessor clutter
from C and C++ source files. It is a more powerful successor to the FreeBSD
'unifdef' tool."


Comment 3 David Woodhouse 2007-02-09 11:18:17 UTC
No, I have no particular need for it since the kernel now includes its own copy
of unifdef; it doesn't use the external one any more.

Comment 4 Jonathan Underwood 2007-03-02 15:59:50 UTC
Well, since unifdef is largely unmaintained as far as I can tell, shall we drop
the package? Would you like to co-maintain sunifdef? :)

Comment 6 Robert Scheck 2008-12-28 23:34:07 UTC
David, if you don't care about this package, please orphan it according to
the Fedora Guidelines. Anyway, the package already got reviewed when reading
bug #190362 and bug #189937. Warren set the flag for this review request,
too - closing now.