Re: File is BCP 78 or Simplified BSD? Lintian says BCP 78
Nicholas D Steeves writes ("File is BCP 78 or Simplified BSD? Lintian says BCP 78"):
> I am wondering if Lintian correctly detected a file's copyright as BCP
> 78, or if it's a false alarm. I want to believe that it's a false
> alarm, but have submitted a patch to make the package dfsg-free in
> case it is not a false positive (Bug #868258).
It's a false alarm. I think the file is entirely "Code Components"
which the text itself says is released under the "simplified BSD"
licence, and it references sha.h, which is here
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kdave/btrfs-progs/master/tests/sha.h
It would be best to tidy up by getting rid of the misleading BCP78
boilerplate, which doesn't apply to the code, only to the rest of the
document (none of which seems to be present in sha224-256.c at least).
> The file in question is btrfs-progs/tests/sha224-256.c
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kdave/btrfs-progs/master/tests/sha224-256.c
>
> I am writing to you because it seems like this might be a matter of
> interpretation. eg: that the official specification is BCP 78, but
> that the code samples are Simplified BSD. It might also be necessary
> to consult two other files introduced in the same commit. Here is
> that commit:
>
> https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-progs/commit/4ddd6055c333932b561046ad1d41234d773246d2
github says "3 changed files" and then lists changes to 2 files. The
changes to sha.h are fine. What is the 3rd file ?
Ian.
Reply to: