Broadcom hybrid_wl driver
Chris Nolan
chris at cenolan.com
Mon Oct 27 21:48:33 CET 2008
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 27.10.2008 12:15, Chris Nolan wrote:
>>
>> As an end user I find that slightly confusing to have so many
>> different permutations. I would find it less confusing to do your
>> original way and drop the "hybrid" altogether:
>>
>> "kmod-wl" for the kmod package
>> "broadcom-wl" for the "userland" package
>
> Sounds good.
>
>> which provides broadcom-wl-common = %{version}-%{release}
>
> That nevertheless needs to provide "wl-kmod-common =
> %{version}-%{release}" to satisfy the dep that automatically (by the
> dark magic from kmodtool) gets added to each kmod package; but the
> user normally won't see that.
>
Hi Thorsten
I have done this, but just to be clear, does this mean that
xxx-kmod-common is automatically added as a dependency to any xxx-kmod
package, and if so, is it safe to remove
Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release}
from the spec file? Also, if that is the case, what if there was no
xxx-kmod-common package actually required? (this package only needs one
because of the requirement to bundle the license.txt)
Regardless, I've made some changes and put a review request in:
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Best
Chris
More information about the rpmfusion-developers
mailing list