Juergen Weigert wrote:
> On Jul 25, 07 15:40:26 +0200, Petr Cerny wrote:
>> Juergen Weigert wrote:
>>> Due to the symlink, the package has now one more dependency.
>>> It is simply an incomplete package, unless licenses.rpm is also installed.
>>> If the FSF insists on having a copy in each RPM, we can simply stop doing
>>> symlinks for GPL, and still have saved a tree with all the other licenses
>>> symlinked.
>> As GPL is (by guess) in most of our packages, it wouldn't make sense to
>> create license-package without GPL in it.
> 
> Besides saving space on distribuition media, 
> the license package serves another goal:
> It establishes /usr/share/doc/licenses as a central point for license
> files. This goal could also be achieved by other means. Open to
> suggestions.

And even if FSF doesn't accept our solution. We could just use
/usr/share/doc/licenses (+/md5/ab58...586cc) for storing the license of
our package. The same file would be just owned by several packages. Plus
linking it from our package.

OK, not a nice solution, but it might work if the licenses.rpm one fails.

Lukas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to