Thanks, the typo is just in my mail, the PKGBUILD is correct (OT: according to wikipedia, "license" is used in american english but "licence" is used in all other english speaking countries. In french the word is also "licence"... my brain hurts).
I agree that it is more a philosophical question than a technical one, but it seems logical to me to reflect that the licence applies to the software "gnuplot" and not to the package "gnuplot-nox". regarding your ps, doing the symlink the other way around should get namcap happy (?). @g.schilisio : do you have a PKGBUILD in mind that does a symlink ? I'm looking for the "right" way to do it. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Rafael Ferreira <[email protected]>wrote: > Em 18/11/2013 09:27, G. Schlisio escreveu: > > well spotted misspelling, but his question was to put license file >> into /usr/share/licenses/gnuplot{,-nox}. >> i suppose you could try adding a symlink from gnuplot-nox to gnuplot, >> so namcap complains no more. >> quite some other packages do that as well. >> georg >> > > Well, Arch packaging standard says /usr/share/licenses/$pkgname is the > correct license folder. And namcap respects that while verifying his > package. Case it is not desire of the maintainer to use this standard > (without typos and in $pkgname dirname), arch system won't break... but he > will not be following correctly the aforementioned standard. > > ps.: Doing a symlink won't vanish namcap's warning because symlink != > directory. Anyway, it is just a warning. > -- Jonathan Gibert Consultant www.iconsultants.fr
