Control: tags -1 moreinfo On 2014-10-21 01:54, Ben Finney wrote: > 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. >
Hi Ben, It is because you added the "License" to the "header" paragraph[0][1]. It is unclear to me that this counts as a "stand-alone" license paragraph, but Lintian was coded with the assumption that it does not. Keep in mind that the license field in the "header" paragraph has a special meaning compared to license fields in other paragraphs[2]. ~Niels [0] https://alioth.debian.org/scm/loggerhead/collab-maint/lojban-common/lojban-common.debian/view/head:/debian/copyright [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#file-syntax [2] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#header-paragraph -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
