I found this bugreport while tracking down this lintian complaint. I'm not sure the warning is useful. Just consider the examples inside DEP5 itself. As far as I understand, those wouldn't be compliant with this check -- example 3 and 4 have multiple 'License: GPL-2+' statements with different text.
For me lintian complained about the two GPL-3+ licensed block in the 'libidn2-0' package: https://sources.debian.net/src/libidn2-0/0.10-2/debian/copyright/ I think the approach I'm using in that package is useful: the comments for the two blocks of GPL-3+ licensed files are different because the copyrights are different and the origins of the files are different. I never read DEP5 saying this isn't permitted. If I'm mistaken, maybe this aspect of DEP5 could be clarified. Maybe it helps to consider this question: What kind of problem was this check intended to identify? /Simon
pgpC0yq2SOF8B.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
