[Bug 2140] bombono-dvd - DVD authoring program with nice and clean GUI

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2140 --- Comment #38 from Jeremy Newton <alexjnewt(a)hotmail.com&gt; 2012-03-31 00:25:51 CEST --- Alright! Lets get this review going: Package review: +: OK -: must be fixed =: should be fixed (at your discretion) ?: Question or clairification needed N: not applicable MUST: [?] rpmlint output I can't build it, see below [+] follows package naming guidelines [+] spec file base name matches package name [-] package meets the packaging guidelines =The group category should be removed, as it is no longer required. -%{?rel_tag} is not necessary, please remove it -Requires(post) and (postun) is not necessary, please remove it [+] package uses a Fedora approved license: GPLv2 and GPLv2+ and Boost and Python and LGPLv2+ [+] license field matches the actual license. [+] license file is included in %doc: [+] spec file is in American English [-] spec file is legible -Please add something along the lines of "##Commands to grab from git" above the commands to grab the source. [-] sources match upstream: md5sum do not matche -This is a blocking issue. Please make sure your source grab commands always grab the right source. I compared the md5sum of the source in you provided in the srpm and the the md5sum of the source that I grabbed with those commands. Also, tip for this package and or later on, using "--exclude-vcs" will ignore all vcs files, such as ".svn" or ".git" [-] package builds on at least one primary arch: I get these errors: src/mlib/sdk/asl_any_iter.h:6:34: fatal error: adobe/any_iterator.hpp: No such file or directory compilation terminated. Are you sure you fixed the ASL issue correctly [N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch [?] all build requirements in BuildRequires Shouldn't there also be ASL in the BuildRequires? [+] spec file handles locales properly [N] ldconfig in %post and %postun [+] no bundled copies of system libraries: One bundled library is included but this has an exception, so you are alright. [N] no relocatable packages [+] package owns all directories that it creates [+] no files listed twice in %files [+] proper permissions on files [+] consistent use of macros [N] code or permissible content [N] large documentation in -doc [N] no runtime dependencies in %doc [N] header files in -devel [N] static libraries in -static [N] .so in -devel [N] -devel requires main package [+] package contains no libtool archives [+] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install/validate [+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages [+] all filenames in UTF-8 SHOULD: [N] query upstream for license text: Not checked [N] description and summary contains available translations: This is not required, so no need to do it unless you want to. [-] package builds in mock: does not build [-] package builds on all supported arches: does not build [-] package functions as described: does not build [N] sane scriptlets: Not checked [N] subpackages require the main package [N] placement of pkgconfig files [N] file dependencies versus package dependencies [+] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts Unfortunately there's seems to be a few problems with the build. Let me know when you fix them so I can finish my review. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.