Re: license of not built library

11 Mar 2023

      On Freitag, 10. März 2023 23:44:42 CET Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Friday 2023-03-10 23:36, Cor Blom wrote:
> > If the source package include a library that is not built and not part of
> > the binary, should it then be mentioned in the license line in the spec?
> The first License: line of the spec file also gets applied into the SRPM
> - so that is the one where you would want to specify all included
> licenses.

Since RPM 4.18 there also is the SourceLicense tag, see
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/rpm-4.18.0-release/docs/
manual/spec.md#sourcelicense

So you can use something like:

```
%if 0%{?suse_version} >= 1599
SourceLicense: GPL-2.0-or-later AND Apache-2.0
License:       GPL-2.0-or-later
%else
License:       GPL-2.0-or-later AND Apache-2.0
%endif
```

Regards,

Stefan

-- 
Stefan Brüns  /  Bergstraße 21  /  52062 Aachen
phone: +49 241 53809034     mobile: +49 151 50412019