On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Mattia Verga <mattia.verga@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Il 12/03/2012 13:33, Dennis Gilmore ha scritto: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 08:19:38 -0400 >> Stephen Gallagher<sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 13:01 +0100, Brendan Jones wrote: >>>> >>>> On 03/12/2012 03:46 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I checked in a tarball for egoboo that turned out to have a >>>>> non-free (noncommercial restriction) font file in it. The tarball >>>>> has only been used for local builds (no scratch-builds). Do I >>>>> need to remove this tarball from the lookaside cache? If so how >>>>> do I do it? The hash is e6f3130695d297dcd9fe74e50bd59b68. >>>> >>>> Does that mean any source tarballs containing non-free content >>>> should be repacked by the maintainer even if the source rpm doesn't >>>> install/use any of the non-free content? I've been recently >>>> commenting on a review where this might apply. >>> >>> Yes, see >>> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code >> >> Also you should neverdo a scratch build with prohibited code/items. >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) >> >> iEYEARECAAYFAk9d7QkACgkQkSxm47BaWffvXQCdEKN9d0P8pl+UKPRiTRNUDoPc >> Rj8AmQGNcKVwqVkMX4C82RCw1t8qyO0E >> =/9AT >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > And what about for pre-built binary files contained in source that are not > installed in the final rpm (ex. deleted in the %setup stage)? Should the > source be purged from those? If the licensing is such that they can't be redistributed, yes. -J > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
