|Summary:||net-libs/polarssl: LICENSE misses the 'FOSS License Exception' part|
|Product:||Gentoo Linux||Reporter:||Michał Górny <mgorny>|
|Component:||Current packages||Assignee:||Thomas Sachau <tommy>|
|Severity:||normal||CC:||hasufell, licenses, ryao|
|Package list:||Runtime testing required:||---|
|Bug Depends on:|
Description Michał Górny 2014-03-07 21:58:36 UTC
(CC-ing licenses@ with hope they could suggest an elegant way of handling this) net-libs/polarssl-1.3.0 has: LICENSE="GPL-2" which suggests that it's impossible to use the library in non-GPL code. However, upstream has a FOSS License Exception  which allows linking a few other FOSS licenses . :https://polarssl.org/foss-license-exception :https://polarssl.org/kb/licensing/using-polarssl-in-a-non-gpl-project
Comment 1 Ulrich Müller 2014-03-08 07:30:59 UTC
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #0) > LICENSE="GPL-2" License notices in source files say "version 2 or later", so this should be "GPL-2+". > which suggests that it's impossible to use the library in non-GPL code. A library licensed under the GPL can be linked with any program under a GPL-compatible license. (See the @GPL-COMPATIBLE license group for a list.) On your own system, you can also link it with anything that is incompatible with the GPL, but you cannot distribute the resulting binary. > However, upstream has a FOSS License Exception  which allows linking a > few other FOSS licenses . > > :https://polarssl.org/foss-license-exception > :https://polarssl.org/kb/licensing/using-polarssl-in-a-non-gpl-project Hm, most of the licenses they list in  are GPL-compatible anyway. AFAICS, the only ones where their exception has an effect (i.e. that are incompatible with the GPL) are Apache-1* and EUPL-1.0. > (CC-ing licenses@ with hope they could suggest an elegant way of handling > this) We have a few other licenses of the GPL-2-with*exception* type already, and we have gcc-runtime-library-exception-3.1, too. @Licenses team: Do we prefer the former (i.e. exception and GPL together in one file), or the latter (exception in a file of its own)? Disclaimer: IANAL, TINLA.
Comment 2 Julian Ospald 2014-07-04 22:24:35 UTC
anything to do here? Otherwise I will close this bug.
Comment 3 Larry the Git Cow 2018-01-15 04:15:22 UTC
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=b01ba5b1c17186f40b54490d8f901211167da49a commit b01ba5b1c17186f40b54490d8f901211167da49a Author: Thomas Deutschmann <firstname.lastname@example.org> AuthorDate: 2018-01-15 04:13:05 +0000 Commit: Thomas Deutschmann <email@example.com> CommitDate: 2018-01-15 04:13:05 +0000 net-libs/polarssl: Removal Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/6124 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/503782 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/537108 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/618354 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/503604 net-libs/polarssl/Manifest | 1 - .../files/polarssl-1.3.9-respect-cflags.patch | 15 ---- net-libs/polarssl/metadata.xml | 18 ---- net-libs/polarssl/polarssl-1.3.9-r1.ebuild | 95 ---------------------- net-libs/polarssl/polarssl-1.3.9.ebuild | 92 --------------------- profiles/default/linux/package.use.mask | 4 - profiles/package.mask | 6 -- 7 files changed, 231 deletions(-)