Spec URL: http://www-sop.inria.fr/geometrica/team/Laurent.Rineau/Fedora/wbxml2.spec
SRPM URL: http://www-sop.inria.fr/geometrica/team/Laurent.Rineau/Fedora/wbxml2-0.9.2-3.src.rpm
The WBXML Library (libwbxml) contains a library and its associated tools to
parse, encode and handle WBXML documents. The WBXML format is a binary
representation of XML, defined by the Wap Forum, and used to reduce
bandwidth in mobile communications.
This library is a required by libsyncml (to be submitted latter).
wbxml2 is an orphaned and meanwhile dead.package:
+ package builds in mock (development i386) for FC6.
+ rpmlint is silent for RPM and SRPM.
+ source files match upstream.
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named and is cleanly written.
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
+ %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required.
+ %doc does not affect runtime.
+ COPYING included in %doc.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ libwbxml2.pc file present.
+ -devel subpackage exists
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available.
+ owns the directories it creates.
+ doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
Don't forget to CLOSE this bug with resolution NEXTRELEASE
Thank you paragn (I cannot know if Parag is a first name or a family name,
As wbxml2 was orphaned. I have to follow the rules of:
Well, as far as I can see, I only have to tell fedora-extras-list that I want
to take over wbxml2.
I have contacted Michael Schwendt (that appears in the former wbxml2
changelog) by e-mail to know if there was issues that lead to orphaning
Perhaps I should also include the former changelog in my new spec file.
Build for rawhide. Build job 22503.
I have just submitted a new request, for libsyncml this time. See bug #217524.