Bug 139703

Summary:	underquoted definition of AM_PATH_LIBOLE2
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu>
Component:	libole2	Assignee:	Caolan McNamara <caolanm>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	3	CC:	michal
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2004-11-19 11:32:15 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description H.J. Lu 2004-11-17 16:50:06 UTC

When running /usr/bin/aclocal-1.9 from automake-1.9.2-3 under
libstdc++-v3 in gcc 4.0, I got

# aclocal-1.9
/usr/share/aclocal/libole2.m4:18: warning: underquoted definition of
AM_PATH_LIBOLE2
  run info '(automake)Extending aclocal'
  or see
http://sources.redhat.com/automake/automake.html#Extending-aclocal

I have libole2-0.2.4-8.1.

Comment 1 Caolan McNamara 2004-11-19 11:32:15 UTC

You're libole2 is a holdover from an older version of fedora. Its no
longer part of FC3. Nothing should require it anymore and its
functionality is replaced with that of libgsf. You should be able to
rpm --erase it. There isn't going to be any updates for it any more.

Comment 2 Caolan McNamara 2005-02-18 09:01:54 UTC

*** Bug 149006 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Michal Jaegermann 2005-02-18 17:16:27 UTC

> Nothing should require it anymore and its functionality is replaced
> with that of libgsf.

In such case it is not really that good that

   rpm -q --obsoletes libgsf

responds with "(none)".  Should I file a bug against libgsf packaging?

I indeed had libole2 on my "rawhide" installation where it was
installed a while ago and nothing removed it.  Without "obsoletes"
this may happen in many update scenarios.