Riku Voipio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 28 April 2006 13:34, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> The following packages appear to contain IETF RFCs/drafts, and I'll
>> file bug reports for them:
>
> As per good mass filing practices, can you create a linda/lintian test out of
> your method you used to search for the rfc's ? This would have several
> advantages:
>
> 1) Active maintainers will fix the problem before you start your mass filing.
> 2) It will be harder to accidentally re-introduce the rfc files when upstream
> releases new tarballs, or when new packages are added to archive.
Good idea!
My method was to look for files named ^.*/rfc[0-9]+.(html|txt)(.gz)?$.
I think the patch to lintian below achieve this, but I have no idea
whether it is a good idea. I'll report this to as a lintian bug.
/Simon
--- files.orig 2006-04-28 16:07:01.000000000 +0200
+++ files 2006-04-28 16:07:20.000000000 +0200
@@ -464,6 +464,11 @@
tag "extra-license-file", "$file";
}
+ # ---------------- non-free RFC files
+ if ($file =~ m,.*/rfc[0-9]+(\.(txt|html(\.gz|\.bz2)?))?$,i) {
+ tag "non-free-rfc-file", "$file";
+ }
+
# ---------------- plain files
if ($perm =~ m/^-/) {
--- files.desc.orig 2006-04-28 16:07:06.000000000 +0200
+++ files.desc 2006-04-28 16:05:11.000000000 +0200
@@ -352,6 +352,14 @@
<tt>debian/copyright</tt> file. This usually makes it unnecessary
for the package to install this information in other places as well.
+Tag: non-free-rfc-file
+Type: warning
+Ref: policy 2.2
+Info: This filename looks like an IETF RFC. The IETF RFCs are not
+ licensed under a DFSG free license, so they should not be part of
+ packages in main. See also <a
href="http://release.debian.org/removing-non-free-documentation";><tt>
+ http://release.debian.org/removing-non-free-documentation</tt></a>.
+
Tag: non-standard-toplevel-dir
Type: error
Info: The Filesystem Hierarchy Standard forbids the installation of new
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
