Bug 1121358

$ rpmlint xmlrpc-epi xmlrpc-epi-devel
xmlrpc-epi-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
xmlrpc-epi-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Naming: ok

License: ok

Sources: ok
081e605491429cda17c5f021f211b8fd  xmlrpc-epi-0.54.2.tar.bz2

scriptlets: ok


1.  SHOULD omit deprecated .spec constructs including:
Group:,BuildRoot: tags
%defattr lines
(empty) %clean section

2.  -devel subpkg MUST use %{?_isa} for main dep dependency, like:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

3. SHOULD document the need/use-of
rm -r %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
in %install section (preferably in a .spec comment)
As far as I can tell, this is not needed, and can be removed.

4.  SHOULD drop uneccessary 
BuildRequires: libtool

5.  document (or remove) this item in %build section:
cp -pv [A-Z]* ..
As far as I can tell, this is not needed, and can be removed.

6.  SHOULD explicitly track library soname (so bumps aren't surprising). e.g. replace
%{_libdir}/libxmlrpc-epi.so.*
with
%{_libdir}/libxmlrpc-epi.so.0*

SPEC: http://spstarr.fedorapeople.org/packages/review/xmlrpc-epi.spec
SRPM: http://spstarr.fedorapeople.org/packages/review/xmlrpc-epi-0.54.2-1.fc21.src.rpm


1.  SHOULD omit deprecated .spec constructs including:
Group:,BuildRoot: tags
%defattr lines
(empty) %clean section

-- FIXED


2.  -devel subpkg MUST use %{?_isa} for main dep dependency, like:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

-- FIXED


3. SHOULD document the need/use-of
rm -r %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
in %install section (preferably in a .spec comment)
As far as I can tell, this is not needed, and can be removed.

-- DOCUMENTED: Those are test tools, we don't need them installed

4.  SHOULD drop uneccessary 
BuildRequires: libtool

-- FIXED

5.  document (or remove) this item in %build section:
cp -pv [A-Z]* ..
As far as I can tell, this is not needed, and can be removed.

-- FIXED not needed

6.  SHOULD explicitly track library soname (so bumps aren't surprising). e.g. replace
%{_libdir}/libxmlrpc-epi.so.*
with
%{_libdir}/libxmlrpc-epi.so.0*

-- FIXED now explicit

Looks good, APPROVED (though you didn't increment Release, it's a good idea to that even for reviews)

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
Short Description: An implementation of the XML-RPC protocol in C
Upstream URL: http://xmlrpc-epi.sourceforge.net/
Owners: spstarr
Branches: fc21
InitialCC:

resetting review flag, I think you meant fedora-cvs flag

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Ping, I don't see any imports or builds yet.  Did you forget or have some problem I can help with?

Sorry, I've just gotten back to things. Attempted to push (and remove dead.package).

W access for xmlrpc-epi DENIED to spstarr

Can someone fix please?

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
Short Description: An implementation of the XML-RPC protocol in C
Upstream URL: http://xmlrpc-epi.sourceforge.net/
Owners: spstarr
Branches: fc21 devel
InitialCC:

I meant...

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
New Branches: devel
Owners: spstarr
InitialCC:

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
New Branches: devel
Owners: spstarr
InitialCC:

Third time's a charm, right?

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
New Branches: fc21 devel
Owners: spstarr
InitialCC:

Third time's a charm, right?

Let's try this version instead:

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
New Branches: f21 devel
Owners: spstarr rdieter
InitialCC:

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xmlrpc-epi
New Branches: f21 devel
Owners: spstarr rdieter
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

This is already in Fedora 22