Your message dated Sun, 08 Sep 2013 14:00:33 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#681616: lintian: False positive:
unused-license-paragraph.. when two licenses are given and described in
different places
has caused the Debian Bug report #681616,
regarding lintian: False positive: unused-license-paragraph.. when two licenses
are given and described in different places
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
681616: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=681616
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.8
Severity: minor
Dear Maintainer,
A copyright file with this snippet:
###
Files: *
Copyright: Lor Em
License: custom and Foo
This is some custom license terms.
.
Mentions that Foo license also applies.
License: Foo
This is the standard Foo license.
###
...causes lintian to report "unused-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright"
(provided no one else references the Foo license).
I think that this should be a valid layout, though I'm unsure if there's any
definite answer in the spec.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (800, 'unstable'), (300, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii binutils 2.22-6.1
ii bzip2 1.0.6-3
ii diffstat 1.55-3
ii file 5.11-1
ii gettext 0.18.1.1-9
ii hardening-includes 2.2
ii intltool-debian 0.35.0+20060710.1
ii libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.26+b1
ii libc-bin 2.13-33
ii libclass-accessor-perl 0.34-1
ii libclone-perl 0.31-1+b2
ii libdpkg-perl 1.16.4.3
ii libemail-valid-perl 0.190-1
ii libipc-run-perl 0.91-1
ii libparse-debianchangelog-perl 1.2.0-1
ii libtimedate-perl 1.2000-1
ii liburi-perl 1.60-1
ii locales 2.13-33
ii man-db 2.6.2-1
ii patchutils 0.3.2-1.1
ii perl [libdigest-sha-perl] 5.14.2-12
ii unzip 6.0-6
lintian recommends no packages.
Versions of packages lintian suggests:
pn binutils-multiarch <none>
ii dpkg-dev 1.16.4.3
ii libhtml-parser-perl 3.69-2
pn libtext-template-perl <none>
ii man-db 2.6.2-1
ii xz-utils 5.1.1alpha+20120614-1
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2013-09-08 13:58, Martin Erik Werner wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 01:29:19PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> It seems I forgot to CC you on this. In short, I believe this is not a
>> bug in Lintian, but rather a bug in the DEP-5 copyright file in
>> question. See below for the rationale (or the bug log for #681616).
>>
>> ~Niels
>>
>
> Yeah, this sounds like a resonable interpretation of the spec come to
> think of it, I think I'll go with that and change the d/copyright file.
>
> Close bug?
> --
> Martin
>
>> [...]
Lets close it then. :)
~Niels
--- End Message ---
