Re: Goals of debian/copyright
Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> writes:
> I could never figure out how to separate the license of the binary files
> from the licenses of the source files used to generate the binaries in
> all but trivial cases, so I've avoided drawing distinctions between the
> two. I'm also not sure if there's some case where the distinction
> actually matters. [If there is, pointing it out would be useful.]
Well, one place where it could be useful in the sense of saving time is
where it's a simplification. For example, packages that have mixed GPL
and LGPL code generate binaries that are solely GPL, so there's no need to
add the LGPL information for those individual source files that are LGPL
to debian/copyright if you're only documenting the license of the binary
package.
(This *doesn't* help in the more common case of mixed GPL and BSD code,
since the separate BSD license requirement to preserve the copyright
notice and terms and conditions still applies, I believe.)
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: