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=478432 --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter <fab...@bernewireless.net> 2009-03-15 10:37:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > I'm guessing that Ralf's concern was that the program needs privilege to run > and so should be installed in /usr/sbin. Of course, the current default path > kind of eliminates the difference, but upstream seems to agree. Do you have > any thoughts on this? I will leave the path untouched. > The software seems confused about its license. The actual program clearly > indicates LGPLv2 (only) but COPYING and the included spec say GPLv2. The > software itself overrides, of course, but then I don't see the value in > packaging the useless COPYING file. Could you ping upstream and see if you > can > get them to clarify? COPYING removed and LGPLv2 added as license tag for now till upstream release a new source tarball. > X license field does not match the actual license. LGPLv2 for now. > X BuildRequires fixed Updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/dwscan.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/dwscan-0.2-3.fc10.src.rpm -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
