? rpmlint on every package.
OK name of package accords to the Naming Guidelines.
OK spec file name match the base package %{name}.
OK package meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK package has a good license.
OK spec file is written in American English.
OK spec file for the package must be legible.
OK The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
OK successful koji compilation.
OK correct BuildRequires, Requires.
OK proper use of %find_lang macro.
OK shared library must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
OK relocatable package must state this fact.
OK package must own their directories.
OK permissions on files must be set properly.
OK %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot}.
OK consistent use of macros.
OK package contains code, or permissable content.
OK large documentation go in a -doc subpackage.
OK %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
OK header files must be in a -devel package.
OK static libraries must be in a -static package.
OK pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
OK library files with a suffix (.so) must go in -devel.
OK usually devel packages must require the base package.
OK Remove .la libtool archives.
OK GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file.
OK %install section starts with rm -rf %{buildroot}.    

perl-Unicode-String.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/auto/Unicode/String/String.bs
perl-Unicode-String.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/perl-Unicode-String-2.09/README

The in-cvs version produces followin rpmlint output now:

(none): E: no installed packages by name x86_64/perl-Unicode-String-8
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

(In reply to comment #2)
> The in-cvs version produces followin rpmlint output now:
> 
> (none): E: no installed packages by name x86_64/perl-Unicode-String-8
> 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.    

You missed pressing the shift key and got an 8 instead of a *.

$ rpmlint ~/perl-Unicode-String-*
perl-Unicode-String.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/perl5/auto/Unicode/String/String.so String.so()(64bit)
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

Using perl_default_filter would fix that.

SRPM and RPM shows:
rpmlint ~/Downloads/perl-Unicode-String-2.09-15.fc14.*
perl-Unicode-String.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/perl5/auto/Unicode/String/String.so String.so()(64bit)
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

That's quite usual for perl modules. 

ACCEPT

This spec file patch is needed to filter private library out from provides and to proceed local rpmbuild (rm ask for read-only file removal):

Index: perl-Unicode-String.spec
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Unicode-String/devel/perl-Unicode-String.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -r1.22 perl-Unicode-String.spec
--- perl-Unicode-String.spec    7 May 2010 07:18:08 -0000       1.22
+++ perl-Unicode-String.spec    22 Jul 2010 13:09:11 -0000
@@ -18,6 +18,8 @@
 Requires:       perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo $version))
 # not detected by auto provide scripts:
 Requires:       perl(MIME::Base64)
+%filter_from_provides /String\.so/d
+%filter_setup
 
 %description
 %{summary}.
@@ -42,7 +44,7 @@
   DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT \
   INSTALLARCHLIB=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{perl_archlib}
 find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f \( -name perllocal.pod -o -name .packlist \
-  -o \( -name '*.bs' -empty \) \) -exec rm {} ';'
+  -o \( -name '*.bs' -empty \) \) -exec rm -f {} ';'
 find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -empty -exec rmdir {} ';'
 chmod -R u+w $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*

Applied in perl-Unicode-String-2.09-16.fc14