Package: lintian Version: 2.5.28 Severity: normal The check for “missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright” apparently assumes that any license must have its own separate “License” paragraph.
This restriction does not match Debian policy for the DEP-5 format; the stand-alone “License” paragraph is not required, since the full license terms can be in the “Files” paragraph in its “License” field. An example of a package where this check is giving a false positive is <URL:https://lintian.debian.org/full/ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au.html#lojban-common_1.5_x2bdfsg.1-2>. Each “License” field contains the full license information, and no separate “License” paragraph is needed. The Lintian tag “missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright” should not be triggered when this is the case. -- \ “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “Uh, I think so, | `\ Brain, but balancing a family and a career ... ooh, it's all | _o__) too much for me.” —_Pinky and The Brain_ | Ben Finney <b...@benfinney.id.au>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
