https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1859627 Andy Mender <andymenderunix@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #18 from Andy Mender <andymenderunix@xxxxxxxxx> --- > arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/libiberty/strcasecmp.c, arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/libiberty/strncasecmp.c : these two files contain a statement I cannot really identify what license it is (something from UC Berkeley?) This looks like a legacy BSD license, with added attribution like here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD_with_Attribution And a very very limited disclaimer. More examples of BSD licenses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses Notice that it's very similar to the "Previous license" and even the dates roughly align. > arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/readline/readline/support/install.sh : This looks like an old style MIT license Correct. This is a MIT license alright. > arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/zlib/contrib/iostream2/zstream.h : This looks like CMR license? There is no CMR license in the license table, but it looks like a MIT variant. > 2. file labeled as "ISC License GPL (v3 or later)": > arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/gnulib/import/inet_ntop.c : Yes this file really contains both GPL and ISC license text. Absolutely correct! ISC is compatible with GPL, thankfully. > 4. About "Boost" license tag: > I think it is already contained in my spec file(between BSD ans zlib). Yes, sorry, I missed that. > Now I should at least remove the "NTP" tag in spec file. You may point out what to do with above issues or other problems so that I can deal with them at once. >From my side everything looks okay now. However, please indicate roughly which bits use which licenses, since there is quite a lot of them. Regarding arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/libiberty/strcasecmp.c and arm-none-eabi-gdb/gdb-9.2/libiberty/strncasecmp.c, if in doubt, contact Fedora Legal to make sure it's clear from their side as well. Later, that license text can be added to the BSD license subpage as an extra example. The key point here is that all of these licenses need to be compatible with each other. Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
