LGPL-2.x(-*) templates are missing a line of text compared to the GNU-published texts, causing matching to fail

[pmonks]

The LGPL-2.0 license text published by GNU has, at line 102, this text:

GNU LIBRARY GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE

Similarly, the LGPL-2.1 license text published by GNU also has the same line of text, at line 115.

The associated SPDX templates are all missing this text, so matching against the GNU-published texts fails:

• LGPL-2.0
• LGPL-2.0-only
• LGPL-2.0-or-later
• LGPL-2.1
• LGPL-2.1-only
• LGPL-2.1-or-later

[karsten-klein]

... with respect to the LGPL-2.0 license text...

{metæffekt} Universe
canonical name: GNU Library General Public License 2.0
short name: LGPL-2.0
markers: Incompatible with Secondary License Marker, No Warranty Marker, Patent Information Marker
category: LGPL
SPDX reference id: LGPL-2.0-only
ScanCode reference id: lgpl-2.0
OSI status: approved
Open CoDE status: approved
Open CoDE approved license id: LGPL-2.0-only (SPDX)

ScanCode
matched id: lgpl-2.0

[xsuchy]

I see it there:

• https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/src/LGPL-2.0-only.xml#L34
• https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/src/LGPL-2.1-only.xml#L38
• https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/src/LGPL-2.1-or-later.xml#L20

I stopped there and did not check the rest. Am I missing something?

[pmonks]

@xsuchy yes this is a subsequent instance of the license's name, much further down in the license text. If you follow the links I provided above you'll be jumped down into the template where the name should be (but currently isn't).

I wasn't able to hyperlink to the precise line number in the 3rd party license texts themselves, hence the explicit mentions of lines 102 (LPGL-2.0) & 115 (LGPL-2.1).

[xsuchy]

Aha.
+1 to add it.

[jlovejoy]

fixed by #2440