FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-05-2008, 03:35 PM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default cdparanoia III 10 license change

Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:

On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 10:10 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:



Of these, bmpx and kdemultimedia-libs claim to be v2-only. My reading
of the compatibility matrix is that you can't link to a LGPLv3 library
from GPLv2 code.


This is a correct assessment. Fortunately, bmpx had an incorrect license
tag (GPLv2) when it is actually GPLv2+. I've corrected that in rawhide.

kdemultimedia also had an incorrect license tag (GPLv2), when it is
actually GPLv2+ for the binaries, LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+ for its libraries.
Rex and I have corrected the license tags in rawhide.



Quick question: How do changes like this affect the licenses and
license tags of the dependent programs? Does this change the license of
the shipped binary? Does the license tag need to be changed to reflect
that? (Wondering as I can see GPLv2(only) code and GPLv3[+] code
extending through a chain of other packages to cause problems if this is
correct.


-Toshio

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-05-2008, 04:01 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default cdparanoia III 10 license change

On Fri, 2008-06-06 at 00:27 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> No. I reviewed this package and actually some files in src/ are
> actually licensed
> under strict GPLv2, which renders the license of bmpx to be strict
> GPLv2.

You were right, I was wrong.

bmpx is going to be a concern for cdparanoia.

~spot

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-05-2008, 04:19 PM
Jason L Tibbitts III
 
Default cdparanoia III 10 license change

>>>>> "MT" == Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> writes:

MT> No. I reviewed this package and actually some files in src/ are
MT> actually licensed under strict GPLv2, which renders the license of
MT> bmpx to be strict GPLv2.

This is why it's important to document things like this in the
specfile.

- J<

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:31 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org