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

Bug#513795: "Use of uninitialized value $_ in pattern match" with lintian 2.2.1



Giuseppe Iuculano <giuseppe@iuculano.it> writes:

> License:
>
>     This product is multi-licensed under GNU GPL versions 2 and 3.
>     You are free to choose which one you use
>
>     This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>     it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>     the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
>     (at your option) version 3 of the License.
>
>     This package is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>     but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>     MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>     GNU General Public License for more details.
>
>     You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>     along with this package; if not, write to the Free Software
>     Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301 USA
>
> On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General
> Public License can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL'.
>
> I'm not sure if I should really refer to to
> /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-[version]

Your package is released under either GPL 2 or GPL 3 but not any other
version, which means that your reference is okay at the moment but would
become incorrect as soon as GPL 4 (or even GPL 3.1) were released.  This
is another variation of why Lintian recommends pointing at the specific
versions referenced by the upstream license.

In this case, I would just point to both of the specific versions of the
GPL that the package license references:

    On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License
    version 2 can be found in /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2.  Version 3
    can be found in /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>



Reply to: