The COPYING file in the source tree is a relative symbolic link
to LICENSES/LGPL-2.1-or-later.txt.
ben@musicbox:~/fedora/other/mingw-glib2$ fedpkg prep && find .
-name COPYING -exec ls -l '{}' +
[…]
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 ben ben 30 Jun 13 07:41
./mingw-glib2-2.85.1-build/glib-2.85.1/COPYING ->
LICENSES/LGPL-2.1-or-later.txt
-rw-r--r--. 1 ben ben 1698 Jun 13 07:28
./mingw-glib2-2.85.1-build/glib-2.85.1/docs/reference/COPYING
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 ben ben 33 Jun 13 07:41
./mingw-glib2-2.85.1-build/glib-2.85.1/gmodule/COPYING ->
../LICENSES/LGPL-2.1-or-later.txt
-rw-r--r--. 1 ben ben 26445 Sep 12 2024
./mingw-glib2-2.85.1-build/glib-2.85.1/subprojects/gvdb/COPYING
The %license macro simply copies the symbolic link into the appropriate
directory. It does not use something like install(1) that would resolve
the symlink. In this case, it’s probably best just to change both
instances of "%license COPYING" to "%license COPYING LICENSES/". That
way, the relative symlink will work, and you will also ship all the
other license texts that upstream considered relevant.
While we’re looking at this, the presence of a LICENSE/ directory with
additional license texts should be a hint to consider auditing the
source tree with something like licensecheck(1) to figure out whether or
not "License: LGPL-2.0-or-later" is really the complete license of the
binary RPMs, considering that Fedora no longer employs effective license
analysis[1].
- Ben Beasley (FAS: music)
[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-field/#_no_effective_license_analysis
On 7/13/25 6:16 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2379753
It's reported that the /usr/share/licenses/mingw32-glib2/COPYING and
/usr/share/licenses/mingw64-glib2/COPYING license files are both
broken links. However the spec file seems totally normal:
%files -n mingw32-glib2 -f mingw32-glib20.lang
%license COPYING
(https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mingw-glib2/blob/rawhide/f/mingw-glib2.spec)
I looked into the %license macro and it seems to involve some internal
RPM voodoo. Any idea why it doesn't work here?
Rich.
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
