Hi all, For decades, Debian had removed several programs from netpbm because their copyright holder / license were unknown. Quoting the old `debian/copyright` file:
> UNKNOWN, SO NOT DISTRIBUTED: > > The following programs are in the upstream source package, but do not > have sufficient copyright and license information to be redistributed: > > pamchannel: No copyright / license text found > pamtopnm: No copyright / license text found > pbmto4425: No copyright / license text found > pbmtoln03: No copyright / license text found > pbmtolps: No copyright / license text found > pbmtopk: No copyright / license text found > pktopbm: No copyright / license text found > ppmtopjxl: No copyright / license text found > spottopgm: No copyright / license text found (Of those, I believe that pamchannel and pamtopnm were erroneously included in the list; but that the others are indeed not safe to distribute. Most of them have authorship information, but no license; while pbmto4425 has no authorship information either.) However, when updating to netpbm 10.78 in 2020 (https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/netpbm/-/commit/fe0f4f186ace57995f9e0fd3d4c1da422c0c7457) (included in Bookworm and later), these programs were re-added. Looking at pbmto4425, pbmtoln03, and pbmtolps, I neither see updated information in these files nor them being adequately addressed in the current `debian/copyright` file. Was there a discussion concluding that these programs are actually DFSG-compliant, or was their re-addition an oversight? Several other distros, including Parabola and Guix had been following Debian's lead and removing those programs. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke T. Shumaker Parabola GNU/Linux-libre
