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

[Aaron Griffin]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 3:40 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.

Yes. We are aware. The simple fact is that there are lots of things to
change, and all of us are busy. Considering that it is VERY low
priority, no one has got to it.

You are more than welcome to submit a patch that does this if you
think it can be done faster.