Broadcom hybrid_wl driver

Chris Nolan chris at
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:


More information about the rpmfusion-developers mailing list