On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:29:01 -0400, Tom wrote:
However, if a subpackage is independent of any base package (it
does
not require it, either implicitly or explicitly), it must include
copies of any license texts (as present in the source) which are
applicable to the files contained within the subpackage.
With this we've reached the point once more where the default %doc dir is
a poor choice, because it is based on the subpackage's %{name} instead of
the src.rpm's or base package's %{name}.
For the common tools'n'library split of a package, the changed guidelines
duplicate the license files by storing them in two different directories
when using %doc:
/usr/share/doc/name-1.0/COPYING
/usr/share/doc/name-libs-1.0/COPYING