On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 07:41:06PM +0100, James Westby wrote: > On (25/09/06 01:48), Francesco Namuri wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 11:15:22PM +0100, James Westby wrote: > > > If copyright has been asserted on the file then it must be mentioned in > > > debian/rules, along with its distribution license. If there isn't one > > > you should find out what it is and add it, or drop the file. > > > > It's not my solution, :) > > I have found it taking a look in the dpatch examples > > (/usr/share/doc/dpatch/examples/dpatch/01_config.dpatch.gz). > > considering that it is among the examples of dpatch, I have thought that > > it is released under GPL, your opinion? > > If dpatch is under GPL then yes probably, but confirmation should be > sought. You can also check the debian/copyright of dpatch, as it should > be documented in there. > > James I have seen that quite a lot packages use it (for example grip), without specifying the license in debian/copyright... regards francesco -- Francesco Namuri <francesco@namuri.it> http://www.namuri.it/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature