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.

That really should be a releng ticket not an infrastructure one.

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.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 08:19:38 -0400 Stephen Gallagher<sgallagh(a)redhat.com> 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_Proh... Also you should neverdo a scratch build with prohibited code/items. And what about for pre-built binary files contained in source that are

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Mattia Verga <mattia.verga(a)tiscali.it&gt; wrote: > > 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.

IANAL but I would call the odt "source code" and the pdf "binary" but just use the term "documentation" for either. It is not a binary in the sense of "compiled code".

On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 12:21 -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Mattia Verga <mattia.verga(a)tiscali.it&gt; wrote: > > Il 12/03/2012 13:33, Dennis Gilmore ha scritto: > >> > >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 08:19:38 -0400 > >> Stephen Gallagher&lt;sgallagh(a)redhat.com&gt;  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_Proh... > >> > >> Also you should neverdo a scratch build with prohibited code/items. > > > > 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 So for something that is, say CC-BY-NonCommercial, it would be okay to ship in the SRPM but not in the RPM?

-- Martin Erik Werner <martinerikwerner(a)gmail.com&gt; -- devel mailing list devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel