- Change 
 BuildRequires: /usr/bin/docbook2man
to
 BuildRequires: docbook-utils
as that package provides the binary at least on F-11 and EL-5.

- Change
 /usr/bin/docbook2man rpmconf.sgml
 /usr/bin/gzip rpmconf.8
to
 docbook2man rpmconf.sgml
(rpm will automatically compress the man page)

- and you can shorten
 mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_mandir}/man8
 mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_usr}/sbin
 install -m 755 rpmconf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_usr}/sbin
 install -m 644 rpmconf.8.gz $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man8/
to
 install -D -p -m 755 rpmconf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sbindir}/rpmconf
 install -D -p -m 644 rpmconf.8 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man8/rpmconf.8
N.B. the use of the %{_sbindir} macro.

- Also, you could write out the file names in %files, i.e.
 %{_sbindir}/rpmconf
 %{_mandir}/man8/rpmconf.8.*
(a wildcard is used for the man page in case the compression format is changed in the future)

All but second suggestion implemented. Second suggestion do not work. At least on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, therefore I leave it as is.

New SRPM:
http://cloud.github.com/downloads/xsuchy/rpmconf/rpmconf-0.1.4-1.src.rpm
Update SPEC: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/rpmconf/rpmconf.spec

(In reply to comment #2)
> All but second suggestion implemented. Second suggestion do not work. At least
> on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, therefore I leave it as is.

Do you have redhat-rpm-config installed?

$ rpm -q redhat-rpm-config
redhat-rpm-config-8.0.45-29.el5

%build
docbook2man rpmconf.sgml

%install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
install -D -p -m 755 rpmconf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sbindir}/rpmconf
install -D -p -m 644 rpmconf.8 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man8/rpmconf.8


$ mock -r epel-5-x86_64 rpmconf-0.1.4-1.fc11.src.rpm 
INFO: mock.py version 0.9.16 starting...
State Changed: init plugins
State Changed: start
INFO: Start(rpmconf-0.1.4-1.fc11.src.rpm)  Config(epel-5-x86_64)
State Changed: lock buildroot
State Changed: clean
State Changed: init
State Changed: lock buildroot
Mock Version: 0.9.16
INFO: Mock Version: 0.9.16
INFO: enabled root cache
State Changed: unpacking root cache
INFO: enabled yum cache
State Changed: cleaning yum metadata
INFO: enabled ccache
State Changed: running yum
State Changed: setup
State Changed: build
INFO: Done(rpmconf-0.1.4-1.fc11.src.rpm) Config(epel-5-x86_64) 0 minutes 31 seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/mock//epel-5-x86_64/result

so no problem. There must be something missing on your system if you're doing a local build instead of using mock.

OK. I must done something wrong previosly. When I tried it second time it works.
Updated.
Spec on the same place.
SRPM: http://cloud.github.com/downloads/xsuchy/rpmconf/rpmconf-0.1.5-1.src.rpm

rpmlint output is clean.

MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK

MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. NEEDSWORK
- BuildRoot used is archaic. Use
%(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)
(I still don't see why you would want to use "/usr/bin/docbook2man" instead of "docbook2man". )

MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the  Licensing Guidelines. OK

MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. NEEDSWORK
- License is GPLv2 not GPLv3. (Source code header is binding.)

MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. N/A
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK

SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. NEEDSWORK
- Included COPYING is GPLv3 not GPLv2.

SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK

> BuildRoot used is archaic. Use
It was one of recommended in Guideliness. But if you insist on the most prefered... Changed.

> I still don't see why you would want to use "/usr/bin/docbook2man" instead of
"docbook2man"
I prefer full paths as it prevent path spoofing. Just my opinion. I'm not dogmatic about it. Changed.

> License is GPLv2 not GPLv3. (Source code header is binding.)
Since I'm upstrem, then what I want is binding :)
Changed source header to GPLv3. Mention of GPLv2 was mistake.

Update SPEC:
http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/rpmconf/rpmconf.spec
Update SRPM:
http://cloud.github.com/downloads/xsuchy/rpmconf/rpmconf-0.1.6-1.src.rpm

(In reply to comment #8)
> > BuildRoot used is archaic. Use
> It was one of recommended in Guideliness. But if you insist on the most
> prefered... Changed.

It was missing at least %{release}.

> > I still don't see why you would want to use "/usr/bin/docbook2man" instead of
> "docbook2man"
> I prefer full paths as it prevent path spoofing. Just my opinion. I'm not
> dogmatic about it. Changed.

But that shouldn't be an issue with the build system.

> > License is GPLv2 not GPLv3. (Source code header is binding.)
> Since I'm upstrem, then what I want is binding :)
> Changed source header to GPLv3. Mention of GPLv2 was mistake.

OK.

**

The package has been

APPROVED

Thx Jussi for the work.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: rpmconf
Short Description: Tool to handle rpmnew and rpmsave files
Owners: msuchy
Branches: F-11, EL-4, EL-5
InitialCC:

CVS done.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: rpmconf
New Branches: F-10
Owners: mjakubicek msuchy

(has been discussed with msuchy)

cvs done.