0xV3NOMx
Linux ip-172-26-7-228 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64



Your IP : 3.147.57.239


Current Path : /proc/thread-self/root/usr/share/lintian/checks/
Upload File :
Current File : //proc/thread-self/root/usr/share/lintian/checks/source-copyright.desc

Check-Script: source-copyright
Author: Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org>
Abbrev: scpy
Type: source
Needs-Info: unpacked, src-orig-index, java-info
Info: This script checks if a source package conforms to policy
 with regard to copyright files.
 .
 Each source package should have a debian/copyright file.

Tag: debian-copyright-is-symlink
Severity: normal
Certainty: certain
Info: The file <tt>debian/copyright</tt> is a symlink instead of a regular
 file.  This makes package checking and manipulation more difficult.
 .
 This problem may have prevented Lintian from performing other checks.

Tag: no-debian-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: certain
Ref: policy 12.5
Info: Every package must include the file <tt>/usr/share/doc/<i>pkg</i>/copyright</tt>.
 A copy of this file should be in <tt>debian/copyright</tt> in the source package.

Tag: no-dep5-copyright
Severity: pedantic
Certainty: certain
Info: This package does not use a machine-readable debian/copyright file.
 .
 This format makes it easier to review licenses and can be easily parsed
 by Lintian.
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/

Tag: unknown-copyright-format-uri
Severity: pedantic
Certainty: wild-guess
Info: The copyright file appears to intended as machine-readable, but Lintian
 cannot recognize its format URI.  It could be a typo for a common URI or a
 syntax error in the first paragraph.  Please file a bug against Lintian if you
 believe that the copyright file in syntactically valid and the URI is
 correct.

Tag: boilerplate-copyright-format-uri
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Info: Format URI of the machine-readable copyright file contains
 <tt>VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL</tt> or <tt>REVISION</tt> string.  Please replace it
 with an actual URI or an actual revision number respectively.

Tag: insecure-copyright-format-uri
Severity: pedantic
Certainty: certain
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: Format URI of the machine-readable copyright file uses the plain HTTP
 unencrypted transport protocol.  Using HTTPS is preferred since policy 4.0.0.
 .
 Please use
 <tt>https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/<i>version</i>/</tt>
 as the format URI instead.

Tag: wiki-copyright-format-uri
Severity: pedantic
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: Format URI of the machine-readable copyright file refers to Debian Wiki.
 .
 Debian Wiki is not used for the format development anymore.  Please use
 <tt>https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/<i>version</i>/</tt>
 as the format URI instead.

Tag: unversioned-copyright-format-uri
Severity: pedantic
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: Format URI of the machine-readable copyright file is not versioned.
 .
 Please use
 <tt>https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/<i>version</i>/</tt>
 as the format URI instead.

Tag: out-of-date-copyright-format-uri
Severity: pedantic
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: A newer version of the machine-readable copyright file specification,
 than the one referenced by the copyright file, is available.
 .
 This problem may have prevented Lintian from performing other checks.

Tag: syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The machine-readable copyright file didn't pass Debian control file
 syntax check.
 .
 This issue may hide other issues as Lintian skips some checks on the
 file in this case.

Tag: obsolete-field-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The machine-readable copyright file uses a field, that used to be defined
 by the specification, but has been renamed since then.
 .
 Please use Format instead of Format-Specification.
 .
 Please use Upstream-Contact instead of Contact, Maintainer or Upstream-Maintainer.
 .
 Please use Upstream-Name instead of Name.

Tag: comma-separated-files-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: A list of files in the machine-readable copyright format appears to be
 separated by commas.  The file list should be whitespace separated instead.
 .
 Please note this tag is only emitted once per checked copyright file.

Tag: missing-field-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The paragraph in the machine readable copyright file is missing a field
 that is required by the specification.

Tag: empty-short-license-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The short license field in the machine readable copyright file
 is empty.

Tag: license-problem-undefined-license
Severity: serious
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html
Info: Your copyright file references a license that is not defined.
 Due to copyright law or treaties, files that are not available under
 a defined license are non-free and non-re-distributable.
 .
 Referencing an undefined license could mean the file cannot be
 distributed in Debian or it could simply mean that the existing
 license needs to be documented. In both cases,
 the copyright file should be updated to reflect reality.
 .
 Please re-package the package without the file (if possible)
 or ask the FTP-masters to remove the package.
 .
 If the package has been uploaded to Debian before, and if
 affected files cannot be distributed in Debian please
 remember to also notify snapshot.debian.org about this
 package containing a non-distributable file.

Tag: invalid-short-name-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: certain
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The “License” field contains a short name observed to be a
 misspelling of one of the standard short names.

Tag: space-in-std-shortname-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: certain
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The “License” field contains a short name with a space, which
 does not conform to the specification.

Tag: bad-exception-format-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: certain
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The “License” field contains a short name with a bad exception
 format. According to specification format of exception is:
 shortlicencename with exceptionname exception.
 .
 If more than one exception applies to a single license,
 an arbitrary short name must be used instead.

Tag: missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The files paragraph in the machine readable copyright file references a
 license, for which no standalone license paragraph exists.

Tag: missing-license-text-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The standalone “License” paragraph contains only short license
 name, but not the license text.

Tag: unused-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The license paragraph in the machine-readable copyright file is not
 referenced by any files paragraph.  It could be a typo in the license name or
 the license paragraph is simply not needed and can be removed.

Tag: unknown-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The machine-readable copyright file contains a paragraph that is neither
 a standalone license paragraph nor a files paragraph.

Tag: field-name-typo-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Info: The listed field name is a likely misspelling of one of the documented
 DEP-5 fields.
 .
 Lintian will continue by using the "misspelled" variant, but other parsers
 are unlikely to do so.
 .
 Implementation detail: The typo is detected by using "Levenshtein
 edit distance".  Therefore, if the typo involve several characters,
 Lintian may not detect it.

Tag: ambiguous-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: #652380, https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The paragraph has a "License" and a "Copyright" field, but no
 "Files" field.  Technically, this is a valid paragraph per the DEP-5
 specification.  However, it is mostly likely a mistake.
 .
 If it is a <tt>stand-alone license paragraph</tt>, the "Copyright"
 field is not needed and should be removed.  On the other hand, if it
 is a <tt>files paragraph</tt>, it is missing the "Files" field.
 .
 Please note that while the "Files" field was optional in some cases
 in some of the earlier draft versions, it is mandatory in <i>all</i>
 <tt>files paragraphs</tt> in the current specification.
 .
 Lintian will attempt to guess what you intended and continue based on
 its guess.  If the guess is wrong, you may see spurious tags related
 to this paragraph.

Tag: pipe-symbol-used-as-license-disjunction
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: In contrast to package dependencies, the pipe symbol or vertical
 bar does not indicate a logical disjunction or OR-relationship
 between two license short names. Instead, the keyword "or" between
 two license names indicates the dual licensing.

Tag: dep5-file-paragraph-references-header-paragraph
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The Files paragraph uses a reference to a license which is
 only defined in the Header paragraph.  The copyright specification
 requires that the Files paragraph either contains the full license
 itself or references a "stand-alone" License paragraph, and not the
 Header paragraph.

Tag: dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: This paragraph defines an already defined license.
 .
 According to the specification, short license names are required to be
 unique within a single copyright file.
 .
 This tag could be raised by something like this:
 .
  Files: filea ...
  Copyright: 2009, ...
  License: LGPL-2.1
   This program is free software;
          ...
 .
  Files: fileb ...
  Copyright: 2009, ...
  License: LGPL-2.1
   This program is free software;
   ...
 .
 In this case, you redefine LGPL-2.1 license. You should use
 a stand-alone paragraph or merge the two files (using a single
 paragraph).

Tag: invalid-escape-sequence-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The only allowed escape sequences are "\*", "\?" and "\\" (without
 quotes) to produce a literal star, question mark and backslash, respectively.
 Without the escaping backslash, the star and question mark take the role of
 globbing operators similar to shell globs which is why they have to be
 escaped. No other escapable characters than "*", "?" and "\" exist.

Tag: wildcard-matches-nothing-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The wildcard that was specified matches no file in the source tree.
 This either indicates that you should fix the wildcard so that it matches
 the intended file or that you can remove the wildcard. Notice that in
 contrast to shell globs, the "*" (star or asterisk) matches slashes and
 leading dots.

Tag: file-without-copyright-information
Severity: normal
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The source tree contains a file which was not matched by any of
 the <tt>Files</tt> paragraphs in debian/copyright. Either adjust existing
 wildcards to match that file or add a new <tt>Files</tt> paragraph.

Tag: unused-file-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: minor
Certainty: possible
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Info: The <tt>Files</tt> paragraph in debian/copyright appears to be
 superfluous as it is does not match any files.
 .
 You should be able to safely remove it.
 .
 This can also be caused by incorrect relative ordering of paragraphs.

Tag: source-includes-file-in-files-excluded
Severity: serious
Certainty: possible
Info: A file specified in the <tt>Files-Excluded</tt> field in
 debian/copyright exists in the source tree.
 .
 This might be a DFSG violation, the referenced files are probably not
 attributed in <tt>debian/copyright</tt>, or the upstream tarball was simply
 not repacked as intended. Alternatively, the field is simply out of date.
 .
 mk-origtargz(1) is typically responsible for removing such files. Support
 in <tt>git-buildpackage</tt> is being tracked in #812721.

Tag: missing-notice-file-for-apache-license
Severity: serious
Certainty: possible
Info: The package appears to be licensed under the Apache 2.0 license and
 a <tt>NOTICE</tt> file (or similar) exists in the source tree. However, no
 files called <tt>NOTICE</tt> or <tt>NOTICE.txt</tt> are installed in any
 of the binary packages.
 .
 The Apache 2.0 license requires distributing of such files:
 .
  (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
      distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
      include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
      within such NOTICE file [..]
 .
 Please include the file in your package, for example by adding
 <tt>path/to/NOTICE</tt> to a <tt>debian/package.docs</tt> file.
Ref: /usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0

Tag: files-excluded-without-copyright-format-1.0
Severity: serious
Certainty: certain
Info: The <tt>Files-Excluded</tt> field in <tt>debian/copyright</tt> is
 used to exclude files from upstream source packages such as when they
 violate the Debian Free Software Guidelines
 .
 However, this field will be ignored by uscan(1) if the <tt>copyright</tt>
 file is not declared as following the <tt>1.0</tt> format.
 .
 Please ensure your <tt>debian/copyright</tt> file starts with the
 following line:
 .
   Format: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Ref: uscan(1)

Tag: global-files-wildcard-not-first-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
Severity: normal
Certainty: certain
Info: The specified paragraph in the machine readable copyright file references
 all possible files but is not the first paragraph. For example:
 .
  Files: filea
  Copyright: 2009, ...
 .
  Files: *
  Copyright: 2010, ...
 .
 As the paragraphs is matched on a "last match wins" principle, all proceeding
 paragraphs are overridden.
Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/

Tag: missing-explanation-for-contrib-or-non-free-package
Severity: wishlist
Certainty: certain
Info: The specified package is in the contrib or non-free archive
 area but does not include a "Comment" (or "Disclaimer") field in
 its copyright file.
 .
 Please add a brief comment why this package cannot be part of the
 main Debian distribution.
Ref: policy 12.5

Tag: missing-explanation-for-repacked-upstream-tarball
Severity: wishlist
Certainty: possible
Info: The version of this package contains <tt>dfsg</tt>, <tt>ds</tt>,
 or <tt>debian</tt> which normally indicates that the upstream source
 has been repackaged, but there is no "Comment" or "Files-Excluded"
 field in its copyright file which explains the reason why.
 .
 Please add a comment why this tarball was repacked or add a suitable
 "Files-Excluded" field.