The 'NEWLIB' license lists 39 points with different licenses, which is both very inconvenient to users and a bit redundant. Many of the licenses correspond to regular licenses already in Gentoo, so I think it would be reasonable to replace LICENSE=NEWLIB with a more specific list of licenses.
I agree.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #0) > The 'NEWLIB' license lists 39 points with different licenses, which is both > very inconvenient to users and a bit redundant. Many of the licenses > correspond to regular licenses already in Gentoo, so I think it would be > reasonable to replace > > LICENSE=NEWLIB > > with a more specific list of licenses. (In reply to Matija "hook" Šuklje from comment #1) > I agree. Well then we already have two volunteers to do it.
It makes little sense to replace NEWLIB without also replacing LIBGLOSS, which lists another 17 individual licenses. At first glance, things would map as follows. LIBGLOSS: 1, 2, 11, 13, 15, 17 -> BSD 12 -> BSD-2 16 -> GPL-2+ with exception The rest are BSD-ish licenses but we don't have them: 3 DJ Delorie 5 Advanced Micro Devices 6 Analog Devices 7 University of Utah and the Computer Systems Laboratory 8 Sun Microsystems 9 Hewlett-Packard 10 Hans-Peter Nilsson 14 National Semiconductor NEWLIB: 1, 2, 11, 13, 19, 29, 35, 36, 37, 39 -> BSD 14, 15, 16, 18, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 -> BSD-2 21 -> LGPL-2.1 22 -> LGPL-2 25 -> rc Again, we don't seem to have the following (all are BSD-ish): 3 David M. Gay 4 Advanced Micro Devices 7 Sun Microsystems 8, 24 Hewlett-Packard 9 Hans-Peter Nilsson 10 Stephane Carrez 12 SuperH 17 S. L. Moshier 20 DJ Delorie 23 Intel 38 National Semiconductor AFAICS, the resulting new licenses would be used only by sys-libs/newlib but by no other package. So, I am not entirely convinced that we should split these collections. Also, somebody should check if names for the new licenses exist in the SPDX license list, and if they have been approved by either FSF or OSI. If not, please suggest names for them.
