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=187317 --- Comment #38 from Bruno Cornec <bruno.cornec@xxxxxx> 2008-10-06 10:20:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #37) > We have an issue here. Fedora packages MUST be able to be built using ONLY the > content of the Fedora repository. Hence the Require: mindi-busybox will prevent > building mindi, as long as mindi-busybox is not a valid Fedora package. And I > do not see even a review request for such a beast. Yes. As the global project mondo was needing also buffer and afio, I chose to began with those bricks which are external. I can easily make a request for mindi-busybox once those have been accepted. > Note that I believe that a fork of an existing package would not be accepted > without an approval from the packaging committee. I am sure that a proper > solution could be found, once the correct arguments are presented. As already entioned many times, we nee a very well known version of busybox during restore time (having some functions activated and other not) which we rely deeply on. Upstream is maintaining such a project based on an older but more stable (at least known) version of busybox in order to avoid unexpected issues. THat may evolve in the future but is now required. Hope this helps. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review