[aur-general] Custom licence directory ?

[JoKoT3]

Thanks,

the typo is just in my mail, the PKGBUILD is correct (OT: according to
wikipedia, "license" is used in american english but "licence" is used in
all other english speaking countries. In french the word is also
"licence"... my brain hurts).

I agree that it is more a philosophical question than a technical one, but
it seems logical to me to reflect that the licence applies to the software
"gnuplot" and not to the package "gnuplot-nox".

regarding your ps, doing the symlink the other way around should get namcap
happy (?).
@g.schilisio : do you have a PKGBUILD in mind that does a symlink ? I'm
looking for the "right" way to do it.


On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Rafael Ferreira
<josephgbr at archlinux.info>wrote:

> Em 18/11/2013 09:27, G. Schlisio escreveu:
>
>  well spotted misspelling, but his question was to put license file
>> into /usr/share/licenses/gnuplot{,-nox}.
>> i suppose you could try adding a symlink from gnuplot-nox to gnuplot,
>> so namcap complains no more.
>> quite some other packages do that as well.
>> georg
>>
>
> Well, Arch packaging standard says /usr/share/licenses/$pkgname is the
> correct license folder. And namcap respects that while verifying his
> package. Case it is not desire of the maintainer to use this standard
> (without typos and in $pkgname dirname), arch system won't break... but he
> will not be following correctly the aforementioned standard.
>
> ps.: Doing a symlink won't vanish namcap's warning because symlink !=
> directory. Anyway, it is just a warning.
>



-- 
Jonathan Gibert
Consultant
www.iconsultants.fr