Hey Felix, I figured, I was getting a false positive on the mention of LGPL *because* it doesn't know EUPLv1.2. It probably isn't the only one that mentions LGPL in its license text, right? So my thinking was that Lintian would have some sort of whitelist of mentions of LGPL.
Sadly, I can't share the project I'm working on. It's in the process of being made FOSS, but it's still closed source at this point and not my call to share it. So, I guess I will just use an override for now. Maybe I can tip the scales in favor of LGPL until then, which would also fix it. 😅 Best regards Andreas Lindlbauer ________________________________ From: Felix Lechner <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 8:54:34 PM To: Lindlbauer Andreas Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Bug#985445: lintian: Doesn't recognize EUPL v1.2 as LGPL compatible Hi Andreas, On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 4:30 AM Andreas Lindlbauer <[email protected]> wrote: > > lintian doesn't seem to know about this license. According to my reading of the tag description [1] the issue is not that Lintian does not recognize the EUPL, but that it confuses that license with the LGPL, which is mentioned there. The tag is a request to refer to files installed under /usr/share/common-licenses instead of quoting the text in d/copyright. You are seeing a false positive. Before committing a fix, I would like to run Lintian on your package. Which one is it, please? Kind regards Felix Lechner [1] https://lintian.debian.org/tags/copyright-not-using-common-license-for-lgpl.html
