Hello Roland, thanks for your review. Comments below.
Am Montag, 13. Mai 2019, 11:41:12 CEST schrieb Roland Hieber: > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:24:07AM +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: > > Added information based on what the Debian project found out. > > > > https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/f/figlet/figlet_2. > > 2.5-2_copyright > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <a...@thorsis.com> > > --- > > > > rules/figlet.make | 8 +++++++- > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/rules/figlet.make b/rules/figlet.make > > index b22d22e17..8886beab3 100644 > > --- a/rules/figlet.make > > +++ b/rules/figlet.make > > @@ -25,7 +25,13 @@ FIGLET_SUFFIX := tar.gz > > > > FIGLET_URL := > > ftp://ftp.figlet.org/pub/figlet/program/unix/$(FIGLET).$(FIGLET_SUFFIX) > > FIGLET_SOURCE := $(SRCDIR)/$(FIGLET).$(FIGLET_SUFFIX) > > FIGLET_DIR := $(BUILDDIR)/$(FIGLET) > > > > -FIGLET_LICENSE := figlet > > +FIGLET_LICENSE := BSD-3-Clause AND MIT-CMU AND ISC AND Unicode- DFS-2016 > > AND WTFPL +FIGLET_LICENSE_FILES := \ > > + file://LICENSE;md5=1688bcd97b27704f1afcac7336409857 \ > > + file:// inflate.c;startline=7;endline=27;md5=74ed6158b8244dbc4d91afaf8a39 > > bec2 \ > > + file://utf8.c;startline=2;endline=16;md5=eb9cc57cf60ac24044670bf8dc4755 > > 79 \ > > + file://fonts/8859-2.flc;startline=9;endline=23;md5=1cecb984063248f29ffe > > 5c46f5c04f34 \ > > + file://tests/emboss.tlf;startline=3;endline=10;md5=8e317e9236ffade21fed > > c39e3496eac2 > I was trying to reproduce these, but I got a better match for HPND > instead of MIT-CMU for inflate.c. See lines 29 to 33 in inflate.c, it is explicitly licensed under MIT. However the license text for MIT itself does not match very well, but for MIT-CMU quite well. It's a little tricky to interpret the output of your tool. One has to look very closely at the brackets! Sometimes comparing manually with the annotated license text at spdx.org got me a better result. I often had the case your tool had a higher matching value for BSD-2-Clause, when the license was actually BSD-3-Clause, for example. > And I cannot reprocude the match from > fonts/8859-2.flc, which apparently should be Unicode-DFS-2016? It seems > to me this is a bug in the Debian package you referenced above. I was not sure about this, I actually tried to compare with upstream unicode files, but the licensing was rather unclear to me. From the three Unicode licenses listed by SPDX that one seemed to match best. If someone has a better idea on that, let me know. Greets Alex _______________________________________________ ptxdist mailing list ptxdist@pengutronix.de
