What's going to use it initially?

rpcbind which will replace portmapper. I'm currently working on the
rpcbind rpm now, but I need the libtirpc lib in place to move forward.

Once these two rpms are in place, I can start moving forward on porting 
all the RPC applications (yp*,nfs*, etc) to the new library resulting 
in making them IPv6 aware... 

OK, I suppose. Would have really liked to have had this for feature freeze. :)

Updated Spec and SRPM. Found a problem with last release.

Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/steved/tirpc/lib/0.1.7-3/libtirpc.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://people.redhat.com/steved/tirpc/lib/0.1.7-3/libtirpc-0.1.7-3.fc6.src.rpm

WRT Bill's Comment #7, I totally agree... sooner whould have been better...
So now if you would like be to wait until early FC7 for this code, just let 
me know... 

NEEDSWORK:
- Use %{name}-%{version} in URL field as to not have to update it every time the
version changes.
- Remove Requires(postun) and (pre) on ldconfig, as %post -p picks that up
automagically
- Replace %makeinstall with make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}.  %makeinstall has
been known to break packages in bad ways and its use is highly discouraged.
- Don't package static libraries unless there is a VERY good reason to do so.
- Don't list gssapi requirement specifically, rpm will figure that out on its
own when building the package.

> - Use %{name}-%{version} in URL field as to not have to update it every time the
>   version changes.
Done.

> - Remove Requires(postun) and (pre) on ldconfig, as %post -p picks that up
>   automagically
Done.

> - Replace %makeinstall with make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}.  %makeinstall 
>   has been known to break packages in bad ways and its use is highly 
>   discouraged.
Done. This good to know... I thought %makeinstall was the approved way... I
guess I'll need to make this change other packages as well...

> - Don't package static libraries unless there is a VERY good reason to do so.
So we no longer support static libraries in devel packages? I don't think 
that is a very good idea.. Being that this is a relatively small library
and the RPC code is pretty legacy code... I really don't think excluding the
static library is a good idea...

> - Don't list gssapi requirement specifically, rpm will figure that out on its
>   own when building the package.
So your saying to removed the "Requires:  libgssapi" from the spec file?
How will rpm know that this library needes libgssapi? I must be missing
something... 

Spec file and RPM updated with first three requests... 

> I really don't think excluding the static library is a good idea...

There really is no good reason to ship a static archive.  You're not doing
anybody a favor.  People might inadvertendly link against it and then security
or bug updates don't apply.  Of you want to debug a system and use a specially
annotated DSO which would not be picked up.

Archives should be distributed only for _very_ good reasons.  Small and "pretty
legacy" code is none of them.

I agree w/ Ulrich.

As to the rpm requirement, When building a package, RPM will ldd the libraries
to see what other libraries it is linked against and uses that to populate the
Requires list.  I tested your package myself by removing the explicit Requires:
line, and the rpm that was produced DID have a requirement on the gssapi
library.  This is the preferred method of determining deps.

Just curious.... what is an valid reason to include a static library?

I personally can't think of any off the top of my head.  Others have come up
with reasons, I think maybe some stuff used in a boot environment where you
don't want shared libs perhaps.

Bah, mid-air collision.  But I'll submit this anyway.

There are precious few reasons:

The thing just won't build a .so.

It needs to be linked against something used at boot time or in rescue or single
user mode.

That's about all I can think of.  I've seen that argument for things like
numerical libraries where folks want to link and then run on a different system
without having to install any additional libraries, but I don't recall whether
that argument was persuasive.

Just realised I'm talking about Extras here and this is a Core review, so
perhaps the criteria are different.

> - Don't package static libraries unless there is a VERY good reason to do so.
Done.

> - Don't list gssapi requirement specifically, rpm will figure that out on its
>   own when building the package.
Done.

Spec file and srpm have been updated.

Whoops, just noticed that buildroot isn't quite right.  You have:
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
but the guidelines prefer:
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

By using make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} you no longer have to use
--prefix=%{buildroot} as files install in the right place.

%{_sysconfdir}/netconfig should probably be marked as a config file, perhaps
even config(noreplace).  'netconfig' is a pretty generic term, does anything
else use it or are you claiming that namespace?  (:

Proposed patch to fix things up:

Also changes my example removal of static libs to use your preferred
%{buildroot} rather than $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, for consistency sake.

--- ./libtirpc.spec.jk  2006-08-15 18:03:45.000000000 -0400
+++ ./libtirpc.spec     2006-08-15 18:36:58.000000000 -0400
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
 
 %build
 autoreconf -fisv
-%configure --enable-gss --prefix=%{buildroot}
+%configure --enable-gss
 make all
 
 %install
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@
 mkdir -p %{buildroot}/etc
 make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
 # Don't package .a or .la files
-rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/*.{a,la}
+rm -f %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/*.{a,la}
 
 %post  -p /sbin/ldconfig
 
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
 %defattr(-,root,root)
 %doc AUTHORS ChangeLog NEWS README
 %{_libdir}/libtirpc.so.*
-%{_sysconfdir}/netconfig
+%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/netconfig
 
 %files devel
 %defattr(0644,root,root,755)

Made the following changes and updated the spec file and srpm.

diff -r1.6 libtirpc.spec
9c9
< BuildRoot:      %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
---
> BuildRoot:      %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
54c54
< %configure --enable-gss --prefix=%{buildroot}
---
> %configure --enable-gss
62c62
< rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/*.{a,la}
---
> rm -f %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/*.{a,la}
75c75
< %{_sysconfdir}/netconfig
---
> %config(noreplace)%{_sysconfdir}/netconfig

Ok, approved.  I'm supposing that this will be a dep of other things, so it
doesn't need to be explicitly listed in comps, correct?

Please close when you've built.

Build task:

http://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/brew/taskinfo?taskID=160309