Reinhard Max wrote:
BTW, how does the license package approach fit with licenses that require that the license text be included in any binary distribution? As packages can be downloaded and installed without also downloading the licenses package, people could view this as a license violation.
You wouldn't be able to install the package without breaking dependencies. That's annoying at least. I don't remember anymore what kind of space saving the target of those shared licenses was. If it's about saving space in the installed system what about replacing actual files with hardlinks in %post? RPM doesn't seem to care about hardlink counts in %verify. At install time a recommended dependency on the license package would be sufficient then. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org