Re: Packages containing RFCs

2006-04-28 Thread Simon Josefsson
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 u

Re: Packages containing RFCs

2006-04-28 Thread Riku Voipio
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 seve

Re: Packages containing RFCs

2006-04-28 Thread Simon Josefsson
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Simon Josefsson: > >> text/xml2rfc > > From the debian/copyright file: > > | The software is released under the following license. Note that the > | output produced by xml2rfc may include more restrictive copyright > | statements, to conform with ISO

Re: Packages containing RFCs

2006-04-28 Thread Florian Weimer
* Simon Josefsson: > text/xml2rfc >From the debian/copyright file: | The software is released under the following license. Note that the | output produced by xml2rfc may include more restrictive copyright | statements, to conform with ISOC and IETF requirements. This is why | some of the compi

Re: Packages containing RFCs

2006-04-28 Thread Simon Josefsson
I went over the package list more carefully, and it seems the only two public domain RFCs that are included in Debian testing: usr/share/doc/dhcp3-common/doc/rfc951.txt.gznet/dhcp3-common usr/share/doc/camstream-doc/tech/rfc959.txt.gz doc/camstream-doc The following p

Re: Packages containing RFCs

2006-04-27 Thread Russ Allbery
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here's the rest of my original e-mail: > I just noticed that heimdal-docs contained copies of RFCs, which I > believe are licensed under a non-free license, so I filed bug #364860. > Then I looked at what other packages in testing may have the same >