Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 6:24 AM Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Do we have a command line tool for this? Does licensecheck support SPDX >> identifiers? >> >> (I find the use of browser extension for this very weird. I have the LICENSE >> file unpackaged with the sources on my machine, I am not browsing it on the >> web.) > > licensecheck supports SPDX, you just have to run it with > "--shortname-scheme spdx".
In my recent & limited experience, licensecheck did not
produce valid SPDX output in many cases. As an example,
take a file with the following license header:
/*
* test-run-command.c: test run command API.
*
* (C) 2009 Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusva...@elisanet.fi>
*
* This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
* published by the Free Software Foundation.
*/
I expect it to return GPL-2.0-only, but it returns GPL-2:
$ licensecheck --shortname-scheme spdx t/helper/test-run-command.c
t/helper/test-run-command.c: GPL-2
I did not see any files in the git source labeled with the
appropriate SPDX identifier for GPL-2.0*. Similar for LGPL.
For BSD-3-Clause, licensecheck used a lower-case C, which
then fails to match a valid license in rpmlint.
Am I missing something obvious or does licensecheck not work
as expected? This is with licensecheck-3.3.0-2.fc36.noarch.
--
Todd
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
