On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 09:56:03AM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 1:41 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Replace the boilerplate with corresponding SPDX tag. Since there is no > > explicit GPL version, assume GPL 1.0+. > > > > Cc: Stephan Mueller <smueller@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > crypto/drbg.c | 33 +-------------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 32 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/crypto/drbg.c b/crypto/drbg.c > > index ff4ebbc68efab1..f797deaf3952ef 100644 > > --- a/crypto/drbg.c > > +++ b/crypto/drbg.c > > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-1.0+ > > /* > > * DRBG: Deterministic Random Bits Generator > > * Based on NIST Recommended DRBG from NIST SP800-90A with the following > > @@ -9,38 +10,6 @@ > > * > > * Copyright Stephan Mueller <smueller@xxxxxxxxxx>, 2014 > > * > > - * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without > > - * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions > > - * are met: > > - * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright > > - * notice, and the entire permission notice in its entirety, > > - * including the disclaimer of warranties. > > - * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright > > - * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the > > - * documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. > > - * 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote > > - * products derived from this software without specific prior > > - * written permission. > > - * > > - * ALTERNATIVELY, this product may be distributed under the terms of > > - * the GNU General Public License, in which case the provisions of the GPL are > > - * required INSTEAD OF the above restrictions. (This clause is > > - * necessary due to a potential bad interaction between the GPL and > > - * the restrictions contained in a BSD-style copyright.) > > - * > > - * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED > > - * WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES > > - * OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ALL OF > > - * WHICH ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE > > - * LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR > > - * CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT > > - * OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR > > - * BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF > > - * LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT > > - * (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE > > - * USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF NOT ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH > > - * DAMAGE. > > The non-GPL portion of this notice does not match BSD-3-Clause as > currently defined by SPDX (see: > https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/src/BSD-3-Clause.xml). > This is at least the third time in your recent patches that you have > assumed that a non-GPL license matches a particular SPDX identifier > without (apparently) checking. I missed the point of first clause of this BSD boilerplate, for which I had to not delete the boilerplate. I can keep the SPDX tag if Stephan (original author) or at least Greg agree with this BSD wording variant. > > That's assuming it's appropriate to represent this as a dual license > and omit the 'ALTERNATIVELY' parenthetical. I'm not sure how I feel > about that. Do you mean the SPDX tag should have been with AND instead? Thanks for reviewing. -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
