homepage

The "Copyright" field in RPM spec files is obsolete. 
"License" should be used instead. 

Logged In: YES 
user_id=21627
Can you provide a pointer that shows this obsoletion?
http://www.rpm.org/RPM-HOWTO/build.html#SPEC-FILE
still says Copyright.

Logged In: YES 
user_id=7887
The rpm.org site is much more obsolete than this tag 
<wink>. 
 
Here is an excerpt from a message of Jeff Johnson in 
rpm-list (subject is "Re: three questions about building 
rpms"): 
 
---- 
[...] 
This is historical legacy. Originally rpm had 
 Copyright: GPL 
but everyone said 
 GPL is not a copyright. 
 
So, rpm changed the tag name to License:, and, for 
backward compatibility, used the same numeric value as 
RPMTAG_COPYRIGHT. Now, everyone gets to ask the next 
question 
 
 Which is it Copyright: or License:? 
 
and the answer is <shrug> :-) 
---- 
 
Every distribution working with rpms, including redhat, 
has changed (or is changing) the tag to License. 
Copyright, as Jeff said by himself, is a misgiven name 
for that field. 
 

Logged In: YES 
user_id=21627
So what is the minimum version of the RPM software that
accepts the License: field? It is my understanding that
rpm(1) may blow up if it does not recognize a field.

Logged In: YES 
user_id=21627
It appears that you need rpm 3.x, which was release 1999. I
think this is safe enough to accept this patch; applied as
bdist_rpm.py 1.30.