For the record, it builds with lesstif (bugzilla #203274), so the transition
after openmotif is dropped will be quite painless.

Quick notes...

Release: 1 - needs the dist
License: IBM Public License - is this a valid licence Fedora is happy with?
%prep
%{__libtoolize} --force
%{__aclocal}
%{__autoconf}
%{__autoheader}
%{__automake} -a

Is this lot really needed or can the relibtoolize thing work?

	--with-jni-path=%{java_home}/include \

You need something in the BR if java is going to be used

You have 

%{_libdir}/%{name}/ in files and %{_libdir}/%{name}/samples in samples. As the
files has already taken ownership of %{_libdir}/%{name}, does the second one
need to be in there?

dist - ACK, will fix

License is OSI-approved: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ibmpl.php

%prep - I prefer to spell them out, autoreconf never worked for me

java support is in todo it doesn't build currently, hence commented out
BuildRequires: java-devel

I have %exclude %{_libdir}/dx/samples in main
and %{_libdir}/dx/samples in -samples

build fails

memory.c:69:23: error: linux/sys.h: No such file or directory

Build successfuly in fc5 mock. It's a bug in kernel-headers in devel (missing
sys.h). Filed bug #204538.

According to David, dx is to blame for using a private kernel header. I'll try
patching it out of it then.

http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx.spec
http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx-4.4.0-2.src.rpm

And success! It builds in fc6 mock.

And completely fails to build here. Dies when it gets to compiling the java stuff 

ERRORS
uipp/java/./dx/net/WELApplication.java
   import netscape.javascript.JSObject; (netscape doesn't exist)
   import vrml.external.Node; (vrml doesn't exist)
   extends DXLinkApplication implements vrml... (vrml can't be resolved to type)
   private EventOutSFTime touchTimeEO; (EventOutSFTime can't resolved to type)
   private EventOutSFVec3f vps_tp = null; (as above for EventOutSFVec3f)
   private JSObject window; (JSObject can't be resolved to type)

There plenty of these. Is the spec missing a BR or two?

Hm. Java parts are not supposed to build. I've intentionally commented out java
BRs from the spec. Are you building in mock? If not, you probably have
java-devel installed and configure picks that up and tries to build the java
parts. It builds fine in mock for me.

(In reply to comment #9)
> Hm. Java parts are not supposed to build. I've intentionally commented out java
> BRs from the spec.

This is not good enough for reproducible builds, as demonstrated in comment 8. 
If you intend to have the java parts not built, be explicit about it, eg. using
an argument to ./configure, patch things, or as a last resort if everything else
fails, try BuildConflicts.

http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx.spec
http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx-4.4.0-3.src.rpm

- removed -samples, will package separately
- disable java parts completely for now
- fixed build on fc6
- moved non-binary stuff to _datadir

Created attachment 135465 [details]
rpmlint errors from main dx package

Something is seriously wrong with the package here. It builds fine and the srpm
is clean with rpmlint, but the main package gives the errors with this
attachment (piles of them!) and the devel package gives

E: dx-devel only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
W: dx-devel no-documentation (not worried by that)

E: dx wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/dx/help/dxall549
"F-adobe-helvetica-medium-r-normal--18*"
E: dx non-executable-script /usr/share/dx/help/dxall549 0644

These errors are to be ignored, IMHO. Those are help files, not scripts.

E: dx-devel only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
This is caused by arch.mak file being in %_libdir, I'll move it to %_includedir/dx

Have you updated the spec and srpms? If you have, please can you post the URL
for them? If it's only the spec file which has altered, you only need to upload
that.

http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx.spec
http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx-4.4.0-4.src.rpm

- moved arch.mak to _includedir/dx
- fixed program startup from the main ui

Review:

builds fine in mock, rpmlint doesn't like the packages but on this occasion, the
errors can be ignored
Software installs and works

Good
consistent use of macros
in US-English, UTF-8
License valid
upstream and source tarballs have same md5
correct use of dist
uses smp_mflags
contains docs
contains clean
no ownership problems
devel package doesn't need pkgconfig
no dupes in the rpms

Needs work
%configure \
	--disable-static \
	--enable-shared \
	--with-jni-path=%{java_home}/include \
	--without-javadx \
	--disable-dependency-tracking \
	--enable-smp-linux \
	--enable-new-keylayout \
	--with-rsh=%{_bindir}/ssh \

Trailing \ on the end should not be there.

If you remove this, I'm happy to approve the package as is.

Removed:

http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/dx.spec

You're really picky.

I know, but you love me really :-)

APPROVED

Likewise, thanks!

Imported (wow, that took a while) and built (with a small fix) for devel, FC-5
branch requested.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: dx
New Branches: EL-5

cvs done.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: dx
New Branches: EL-4

cvs done