https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #8 from yonhan@xxxxxxxxx --- Hi Mattia, Thanks for the comments! I checked the section about packaging static libraries, and I think I do need the static library, and I put it in a separate openosc-static rpm. so it should be fine in my opinion. The new %forgemeta works pretty well for openosc, and I like it. Here is the new rpm build results: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/yonhan/openosc/build/1305696/ Comparing with the old rpm build results at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/yonhan/openosc/build/1305433/, it failed for epel and opensuse (which probably does not yet support the new $forgemeta macro), but I guess we only care Fedora, so it should be fine. Here is the updated spec and SRPM after using the new %forgemeta macro: Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/yonhan/openosc/fedora-31-x86_64/01305696-openosc/openosc.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/yonhan/openosc/fedora-31-x86_64/01305696-openosc/openosc-1.0.0-1.fc31.src.rpm rpmlint results also look good: rpmlint openosc.spec openosc-1.0.0-1.fc31.src.rpm 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
