Hi Colin, On Mon, 12 Feb 2018, Colin Watson wrote: > I considered just applying this as a patch in debian/patches/, but of > course that's still distributing the encumbered file in the > .orig.tar.xz, and Lintian just issues license-problem-non-free-RFC about > the patch file instead. (Again, I could override this, but it seemed > questionable to do so.) So my proposal is to commit this patch to my > "upstream" git branch, prepare grub2_2.02+dfsg1.orig.tar.xz from that > branch, and document this in debian/copyright and debian/README.source. > However, I know it's a bit unconventional to change files in a +dfsg > tarball rather than merely deleting them, and I can't meet the > recommendation of the developer's reference above.
FWIW, I did something similar in tcpdf where I had to replace a non-free ICC color profile with a free implementation. In fact I automated the replacement in debian/gen-orig-source.sh. The situation is a bit different because the ICC color profile is not source code but the underlying logic is the same. > Does this seem like a reasonable way forward? > apply the backport as an ordinary patch and override > license-problem-non-free-RFC for the patch file? So yes, I believe it's OK to proceed that way. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/