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

Re: Bug#1093795: RFS: lighttpd/1.4.77-1 -- light, fast, functional web server



On Wednesday, January 22, 2025 6:52:34 PM MST Glenn Strauss wrote:

> PLEASE NOTE: **none** of the issues you raised are reported on

> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/lighttpd


tracker.debian.org is a nice tool, but it does not contain a comprehensive list of all the problems with a package, particularly those that need human review to identify.


> PLEASE NOTE: **all** of the issues you raised are present in the prior

> lighttpd package.  Why is this suddenly a blocker to release rather than

> suggestions for a future release?


Many Debian packages have problems that existed in previous releases.  A RFS is a good time to identify and correct them.


> > 3. Licenses [4]: Issue

> >

> > philwyett@ks-tarkin:~/Development/builder/debian/lighttpd$ lrc

> > en: Versions: recon '3.4'  check '3.3.9-1'

> >

> > Parsing Source Tree  ....

> > Reading d/copyright  ....

> >

> >   Missing Files: Paragraph for debian/

> >

> > Running licensecheck ....

> >

> > d/copyright      | licensecheck

> >

> > BSD-3-clause     | GPL-1             debian/lighty-enable-mod

> >

> > File states:

> >

> > #    You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public

> > #    License[1] or the Artistic License[2].

>

> This is not reported on https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/lighttpd


I would not expect it to be.  tracker.debian.org does not do any automatic checking of licensing information because it is too easy to hit false positives.


> This is newly reported, as this file has been part of the lighttpd

> debian package circa 2006.


A lot of time licensing information is missed.  One of the great things that Phil is doing is running lrc (licence recon, which is a relatively new tool that I don’t think was available in 2006) against every RFS package, which is illuminating a lot of tricky licensing issues.  However, you should note that lrc is prone to a lot of false positives (because parsing licensing information is difficult, so it is not run automatically in places like tracker.debian.org.  When you do find a false positive, you can override it similar to how you override incorrect lintian tags.  For example:


https://salsa.debian.org/soren/privacybrowser/-/blob/master/debian/lrc.config?ref_type=heads



--

Soren Stoutner

soren@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: