[aur-general] Custom licence directory ?

[Jerome Leclanche]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:23 PM, JoKoT3 <jokot3 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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

I'm also interested in the correct fix. This is a problem that affects
every -git package.

J. Leclanche