https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509290 --- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m@xxxxxxxxx> --- An obsolete macro has been found in configure.ac: [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment. AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found ------------------------------ AM_CONFIG_HEADER found in: libvmod-uuid-1.3/configure.ac:7 You need to patch it out: diff -up libvmod-uuid-1.3/configure.ac.fix_obsolete_m4s libvmod-uuid-1.3/configure.ac --- libvmod-uuid-1.3/configure.ac.fix_obsolete_m4s 2017-10-30 19:05:03.000000000 +0100 +++ libvmod-uuid-1.3/configure.ac 2017-12-08 15:35:39.318045033 +0100 @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ AC_INIT([libvmod-uuid], [1.3], [], [vmod AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR([m4]) AC_CONFIG_SRCDIR(src/vmod_uuid.vcc) AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR([build-aux]) -AM_CONFIG_HEADER(config.h) +AC_CONFIG_HEADERS(config.h) AC_CANONICAL_SYSTEM AC_LANG(C) - I renew my recommendation to use a better name for you archive with: Source0: https://github.com/otto-de/lib%{name}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* BSD (2 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* BSD (unspecified)". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/vmod-uuid/review-vmod-uuid/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in vmod- uuid-debuginfo , vmod-uuid-debugsource [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment. See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: vmod-uuid-1.3-3.fc28.x86_64.rpm vmod-uuid-debuginfo-1.3-3.fc28.x86_64.rpm vmod-uuid-debugsource-1.3-3.fc28.x86_64.rpm vmod-uuid-1.3-3.fc28.src.rpm vmod-uuid-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found ------------------------------ AM_CONFIG_HEADER found in: libvmod-uuid-1.3/configure.ac:7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
