[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: copyright precision

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Helmut Grohne wrote:

> Other packages that don't build from source by default include bash,
> dash, debianutils, dpkg, e2fsprogs, findutils, fribidi, gmp, jemalloc,
> libatomic-ops, libbsd, libtasn1-6, lzo2, ncurses, nettle, patch,
> readline6, and sed.

I would add firmware-linux-free and probably any package with a
debian/missing-sources/ directory.

> I believe that being able to build from source is more important than
> copying copyright information from packages in Built-Using.

The latter is potentially a license violation, but I think building
from source is very important. I also think the solution to correct
copyright/license meta-data for binary packages completely relies on
building from source (see my other mail in this thread).

> Now we're two, but that's still not project consensus as can be seen in
> e.g. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=830978#185.

Make that three.



Reply to: