239749 – sys-libs/cracklib is LGPL-2.1

Bug 239749 - sys-libs/cracklib is LGPL-2.1

Summary: sys-libs/cracklib is LGPL-2.1

Status:	RESOLVED FIXED

Alias:	None

Product:	Gentoo Linux
Classification:	Unclassified
Component:	New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware:	All Linux

Importance:	High normal (vote)
Assignee:	Gentoo's Team for Core System packages

URL:	http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/fo...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2008-10-04 23:06 UTC by Luke-Jr
Modified:	2010-02-17 00:24 UTC (History)
CC List:	1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required:	---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description Luke-Jr 2008-10-04 23:06:36 UTC

sys-libs/cracklib has been GPL-2 since 2.8.11

Comment 1 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2008-10-05 19:00:07 UTC

${PORTAGE_TMPDIR}/sys-libs/cracklib-2.8.12/work/cracklib-2.8.12/README-LICENSE:

Comment 2 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2008-10-05 21:29:46 UTC

it's supposed to be LGPL-2.1

Comment 3 Luke-Jr 2008-10-07 19:15:21 UTC

Alec approved (see URL).

Comment 4 Luke-Jr 2008-10-07 19:17:29 UTC

Perhaps "|| ( GPL-2 LGPL-2.1 CRACKLIB )" might be appropriate.

Comment 5 Luke-Jr 2008-10-22 01:41:24 UTC

Does it really take 2 weeks for a simple one-line fix?

Comment 6 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2008-10-26 05:31:47 UTC

if you have a problem with timeframes, sign up to be a dev so you can fix it yourself.  otherwise be quiet.

Comment 7 Luke-Jr 2009-09-18 16:06:03 UTC

Almost a year after the bug was filed...

Comment 8 Nico R. 2009-11-09 18:43:15 UTC

See the following URIs for the current version (cracklib-2.8.13):
http://cracklib.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/cracklib/tags/cracklib_2_8_13/cracklib/README-LICENSE?revision=117
http://cracklib.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/cracklib/tags/cracklib_2_8_13/cracklib/COPYING?revision=117

For cracklib-2.8.13, license is GPL-2, even though the discussion (see URI field) seems to have resulted in using LGPL-2.1.

Please update to LICENSE="GPL-2" for now.

Perhaps Nathan Neulinger should be pinged again about this? (I don’t know the current state of discussion that may have happened directly with him.)

Comment 9 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2009-11-19 04:16:47 UTC

upstream has changed the license as agreed to LGPL-2.1

Comment 10 Luke-Jr 2010-02-16 15:40:38 UTC

sys-libs/cracklib-2.8.13* still have the wrong LICENSE

Comment 11 Samuli Suominen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2010-02-16 15:42:59 UTC

(In reply to comment #10)
> sys-libs/cracklib-2.8.13* still have the wrong LICENSE
> 

le sigh

Can we stabilize 2.8.15 then?

Comment 12 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2010-02-16 22:45:17 UTC

feel free to file a bug.  i really dont care about these licensing issues as it's already been documented that the intention all along was LGPL.

Comment 13 Samuli Suominen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2010-02-16 22:55:24 UTC

(In reply to comment #12)
> feel free to file a bug.  i really dont care about these licensing issues as
> it's already been documented that the intention all along was LGPL.
> 

don't get me wrong, that's pretty much what I wanted to say... "let's stabilize the new version instead, so we don't have to fiddle with the old crap anymore"

Comment 14 Luke-Jr 2010-02-17 00:17:42 UTC

I don't care what version is stable. This bug is regarding the LICENSE for sys-libs/cracklib being incorrect. That is still the case for sys-libs/cracklib-2.8.13*, so it has not yet been fixed.

Comment 15 Samuli Suominen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2010-02-17 00:24:23 UTC

(In reply to comment #14)
> I don't care what version is stable. This bug is regarding the LICENSE for
> sys-libs/cracklib being incorrect. That is still the case for
> sys-libs/cracklib-2.8.13*, so it has not yet been fixed.
> 

And it's fixed in 2.8.15, going stable now. Don't reopen again.