Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: redhat-lsb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226363 ------- Additional Comments From petersen@xxxxxxxxxx 2008-07-04 03:42 EST ------- (In reply to comment #24) > 1. Yes, after reconfirmation with llim, it's GPLv2. I think you need to go through the source files and audit more carefully. Some are clearly GPLv2+ and a few LGPL. > 2. I don't think it's redhat-lsb requiring its own files, redhat-lsb and lsb are > 2 different packages. For example, redhat-lsb may delegate the database querying > job to lsb to find out the dependencies. % repoquery -q --whatprovides /usr/lib/lsb/install_initd redhat-lsb-0:3.1-19.fc8.i386 % repoquery -q --whatprovides /usr/lib/lsb/remove_initd redhat-lsb-0:3.1-19.fc8.i386 % rpm -qlp redhat-lsb-3.1-19.fc8.i386.rpm| grep _initd /usr/lib/lsb/install_initd /usr/lib/lsb/remove_initd > 3. I'd like to know why the path is intentionally hard-coded. Because the directory name should be lib and not lib64 even on 64bit machines I guess. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review