On 24. 12. 21 10:05, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 24. 12. 21 1:57, Ben Beasley wrote:
> I’m aware that pyproject-rpm-macros can handle license files in many cases[1]:
>
>> %pyproject_save_files can automatically mark license files with %license
>> macro and language (*.mo) files with %lang macro and appropriate language
>> code. Only license files declared via PEP 639 License-Field field are
>> detected. PEP 639 is still a draft and can be changed in the future.
>
> (I also know that there are some packages where no license file is marked, or
> where additional license files are needed, and it’s best to verify with “rpm
> -qL -p …” before relying on this feature. That’s not at issue here.)
>
> In a package review, it was suggested that, even when pyproject_files
> includes a license file installed in the dist-info directory and marked with
> %license, an explicit installation of the license file with a relative path,
> such as
>
> > %license LICENSE.txt
>
> might still be needed—under the theory that the license file is supposed to
> be installed in /usr/share/licenses.
This assumption is not true. I even recall asking somewhere wrt Python's
license file:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3.9/c/ff90d23b8f5d2b721aa55289d6...
But I don't recall where. Might have been this list or legal.