Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#36507 - [systemd] Doesn't provide MIT license in package

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Simon Hollingshead (elpasi) - Monday, 12 August 2013, 17:30 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Tuesday, 13 August 2013, 16:45 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

I speak only from knowledge on how AUR works, but I don't believe the rules are any different, so here goes:

systemd reports its licensing arrangement as "GPL2, LGPL2.1, MIT". GPL2 and LGPL2.1 are covered by the common licenses. MIT, however, is not.

((The MIT, BSD, zlib/libpng and Python licenses are special cases and cannot be included in the 'common' licenses pkg. For the sake of the license variable, it is treated like a common license (license=('BSD'), license=('MIT'), license=('ZLIB') or license=('Python')) but for the sake of the filesystem, it is a custom license, because each one has its own copyright line. Each MIT, BSD, zlib/libpng or Python licensed package should have its unique license stored in /usr/share/licenses/$pkgname/.))

There is no /usr/share/licenses/systemd/ folder created in which information about the MIT-licensed part of the package is placed.

I understand this to be bad.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Tuesday, 13 August 2013, 16:45 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  systemd-206-2
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Monday, 12 August 2013, 17:59 GMT
  • Field changed: Status (Unconfirmed → Assigned)
  • Field changed: Category (Packages: Testing → Packages: Core)
  • Task assigned to Dave Reisner (falconindy)
I'll ship this in the next release.
Comment by Simon Hollingshead (elpasi) - Monday, 12 August 2013, 18:23 GMT
Does something similar need to happen for the other half of the split package? The license array applies to systemd-sysvcompat as well, therefore /technically/ expecting a /usr/share/licenses/systemd-sysvcompat/ with an MIT license in.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Monday, 12 August 2013, 18:37 GMT
systemd-sysvcompat is a collection of symlinks that I personally made... if anything, the license array should be removed because there's not really anything to license....

Loading...