Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

--- Comment #3 from John W. Linville <>  2009-01-22 15:47:40 
EDT ---
I chose the "v" version of the crda tarball because those had later dates than
the equivalent non-"v" versions.  I made the assumption that this was the new
release policy for the project.

I'm happy to change the spec summary -- how about "Regulatory compliance daemon
for 802.11 wireless networking"?

I will also include the README files, probably as README.crda and

I will change the ownership of /usr/lib/crda.

I will move and rename the udev rules.  Any suggestions for choosing a numeric

Adding a udev requirement makes perfect sense.

The point about /usr being mounted later is a good one.  I don't know how
realistic a NFS-mounted /usr over wireless is, but it probably makes sense to
allow for wireless networking and all allowed channels even when /usr isn't
mounted.  Are there any other guidelines differentiating /lib versus /usr/lib?

Regarding one package versus two, I'm open to suggestions.  I combined them
under the thought that relying on an externally signed binary would drive some
people nuts.  Building them together allows for an automatically generated key
that can be discarded, similar to how kernel module signing has been handled in
the past.  If that isn't important, than your suggestion regarding /etc/pki is
a good one.  Realistically I don't know how much difference it makes -- I don't
think either crda or wireless-regdb are likely to be spun very often, and crda
is not such a big package as to discourage revving it when wireless-regdb
changes -- thoughts?

In the interim, I'll revise the spec assuming that it remains as a single
package, and I'll probably continue to use /usr/lib/crda for now just because
the crda upstream is preconditioned for that behavior.

Thanks for the feedback!

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Fedora-package-review mailing list

Reply via email to