On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:23 PM, JoKoT3 <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
I'm also interested in the correct fix. This is a problem that affects every -git package. J. Leclanche
