[arch-general] Packages without license field in official repos

[Travis Willard]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Xavi Soler <xavi at interrupciones.net> wrote:
>
> On Friday 22 February 2008 19:36:38 Travis Willard wrote:
>  > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Xavi Soler <xavi at interrupciones.net>
>  wrote:
>  > > My intention is to know the number of non-free packages installed on my
>  > >  system. In Debian I can use 'vrms' [1]. I think Arch has nothing
>  > > similar, but I can start programming an application like 'vrms' (maybe
>  > > using libalpm or calling pacman directly).
>  > >
>  > >  My first test has been typing:
>  > >
>  > >  $ pacman -Q | pacman -Qi | less
>  > >
>  > >  and reading carefully the license fields: most (BSDs and MITs specially)
>  > >  say 'custom'. The big problem I've found is that, quite often, I read
>  > > the word 'none' there, but I can't understant how can it happen in
>  > > packages stored in official repos. There are a lot of packages without
>  > > license field.
>  > >
>  > >  I could do a heavy research to know which packages include a license
>  > > field and which don't, and then warn their mantainers. But it would be a
>  > > waste of time.
>  >
>  > A waste of time we've already done.  We know which packages don't have
>  > licenses - we even have a huge todo list of them.  We'll get to them
>  > at some point.
>
>  I was talking about packages that have a known license but it is not in the
>  PKGBUILD. For example, acpi is a GPL program in [extra] which don't have a
>  licence field in its PKGBUILD.

So was I.