Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523756 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-09-23 03:24:19 EDT --- I guess packages don't get much simpler than this. It looks functionally equivalent to the existing iwl5000-firmware package; since the licenses are exactly the same I'm going to assume that everything is OK there. This package, like the other firmware packages, have no dependencies. I'm going to assume that's OK as well, and that weird install-time ordering won't somehow cause this package to be installed before udev (or if that nothing suffers if that does manage to happen). I haven't the hardware to test this, but I'm sure if anything doesn't work, it wouldn't be due to the trivial packaging. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: 7e81ddad18acec19364c9df22496e8afae99a2e1490b2b178e420b52d443728d iwlwifi-1000-ucode-128.50.3.1.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is acceptable for firmware. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: iwl1000-firmware = 128.50.3.1-1.fc12 = (none) * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package reviews recently, please consider doing one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review