Quoting Marcel Fourné (2015-05-29 11:00:47) > Am Fri, 29 May 2015 09:06:58 +0100 schrieb Gianfranco Costamagna: >> I guess LGPL is not a license, but a *set* of licenses. >> >> >> Maybe you mean something like LGPL-2.1+ or whatever is appropriate >> there (look for the "later" word, licensecheck might help too) > > Thanks, that brought me to the point: I was referencing LGPL-2.1 under > common-licenses, but stated LGPL without version as the license. > Lintian got rightfully confused by that. ;-) The proper License shortname when copyright holder states "[…] either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version." is not "LGPL" nor "LGPL-2.1" but "LGPL-2.1+" - more on License shortnames at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ . The actual License you then should reference in the License paragraph is /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2.1 - without trailing plus: The license itself is not "...or newer", only the license _grant_ issued by the copyright holder. Hope that helps, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature