On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 2:36 AM, François Cami <fcami(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 11:19 PM, Justin Forbes
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 2:19 PM, stan <stanl-fedorauser(a)vfemail.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:55:39 -0500
>> Bruno Wolff III <bruno(a)wolff.to> wrote:
>>> I had filed a bug (1564745) for this a day earlier.
>> Sorry about that. I did a search, and when the top result was the
>> issue, I didn't look further.
>>> One option would be to change the name to match the kernel version.
>>> Another option would be put it in kernel instead of kernel-core.
>>> Another option would be to have a versioned name in kernel-core and
>>> a symlink to it with the normal name in kernel.
>> I vote for one. There's a file for each installed kernel, and upon
>> kernel removal, it just disappears without any checks to see if there
>> are other kernels needing the file.
> I would be happy to hear more feedback on this from people. I am
> trying to decide on the best course to take (this file changes rarely
> and last changed in 2005). I plan to put something in place by rc1
> next Monday.
I'd lean towards having COPYING in the kernel subpackage and
installing it in a versioned directory - trading a very small amount
of disk space for upgrade safety and simplicity.
I think the idea of naming the file COPYING-$kver might be better than
putting it in the versioned kernel directory. Simply because users
know that '/usr/share/licenses/<pkg>' contains licensing information.