Note: The package name was changed after this bug was filed to commoncpp2.

It seems the gnu people refer to the software as commoncpp, even though the
tarball is named commoncpp2.
As the library is named commoncpp2-*.so as well, this is probably a more
sensible name.

Hi Andreas, this isn't a full review (yet!), just a handful of observations:

 - please shorten "A portable and highly optimized class framework for 
     writing C++ applications" to something shorter such as "A portable 
     and optimized framework for C++ applications"
 - "nativily" --> "natively"
 - please delete all *.la files (per the packaging guidelines)
 - the "/usr/include/cc++2" dir is unowned

More observations:

- 1.3.23 is out
- Most likely missing build dependencies: libxml2-devel, zlib-devel, doxygen
- Missing dependency on pkgconfig in -devel
- Missing install-info dependencies in -devel, "|| :" safeguards missing from 
  install-info invocations (breaks --excludedocs installs)
- Installation may try to modify /etc/ld.so.conf

Feel free to borrow fixes for the above and whatever you find worth taking from
my local package at http://cachalot.mine.nu/5/SRPMS/commoncpp2-1.3.23-v1.src.rpm

Hi Ville, I think you have a much better idea whats happening here so, if 
you want, please go ahead and replace me as the reviewer.  Otherwise, I'll 
do what I can to help the submitter get the good bits from your package
incorporated into this one.

1.3.23 is out? hmmm. gonna update that then. The webpage referred to 1.3.22.
About the build-dependencies, mock does build the package as is. I checked.
The sagefuard is a good idea.
The modification of ld.so.conf is taken care of, the Makefile.in is being
patched accordingly.

Thanks so far for the suggestions. I'm gonna update the package.
Only thing I'm unsure about are the .la files. It seems they were being used by
ccrtp. If so, removing them is probably not a good idea.

(Reassigning to myself per comment 4)

Sure, mock probably builds it without the build dependencies, but obviously
leaves out zlib  and libxml2 support.  But if they're installed, the
corresponding features are built in.  So please either add the build
dependencies or explicitly disable these features so that the build is reproducible.

doxygen is a slightly different thing; with it installed the API docs are built
into doc/html/ and I think it would be good to include them in the devel package
(%doc doc/html).

If you're planning to include the *.la, please show a real case where they are
required (not "seems", "probably"...)

Okay, Changes are incorporated.

Take a look please at http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/commoncpp/commoncpp2.spec and
http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/commoncpp/commoncpp2-1.3.23-2.src.rpm

Blockers:
- need fully versioned %{name} = %{version}-%{release} dependency in -devel.
- need Requires: libxml2-devel and zlib-devel in -devel (see ccgnu2-config
  --stdlibs and --extlibs, and libccext2.pc, and some installed *.h)

Suggestions:
- configure with --disable-dependency-tracking for possibly faster builds and
  cleaner build output
- Don't hardcode .gz in info filenames, install-info works without it and * can
  be used in %files
- install-info is not a "Requires", it's "Requires(post)" and "Requires(preun)"
- move %doc in -devel's %files after %defattr (actually, I'm a bit surprised 
  that it being before %defattr doesn't cause problems with files being owned by 
  the build owner here)

Changes incorporated.

http://helena.bawue.de/~ixs/commoncpp/

I'm a bit surprised though, to notice that the external dependencies were not
taken up by rpm automagically.

Looks good.

thx for the review.
as soon as this one is build, I'll put up the ccrtp for review. I'd be glad, if
you could take alook as well.

Normalize summary field for easy parsing

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: commoncpp2
New Branches: epel7
Owners: ixs

Git done (by process-git-requests).