Re: copyright precision
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> But it is actually worse than that. We don't even list copyright for
> what is contained in binary packages.
It isn't hard to do for packages that don't copy anything from other
binary packages, I did this for libicns:
Of course, they are still not accurate because, IIRC, gcc includes
code from itself into ELF binaries.
The only possible way to solve this in general terms is, accurate
document the copyright/license of the source package using the
machine-readable format and during builds, track the transformation of
input files in the source package to output files in the binary
package and then generate the copyright/license information for the
binary package based on which input files from which source/binary
packages ended up in the new binary package.
Then we get to the problem of the accuracy of our debian/copyright
files and that of upstream copyright/icense notices.
I conclude that fixing this is a very long-term project at best and an
intractable problem at worst.