On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 03:13:50PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > >> - * This file is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it > > >> - * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the > > >> - * Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any > > >> - * later version. [ ... ] > > >> * As a special exception, if you link this library with files > > >> * compiled with GCC to produce an executable, this does not cause > > >> * the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License. The "as a special exception" refers to "This file is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it". It is meaningless without having anything it is an exception *to* :-) In general, you should never edit licence texts. > > > Look at that "special exception", why are you ignoring it here? You > > > can't do that :( > > > > I'm not ignoring it, that's the reason why I left it. > > You ignore that part of the license in the SPDX line, why? > > > Isn't it the correct way to do ? How should it be done ? > > You need to properly describe this in the SPDX line. You did not do so > here, which means that any tool just looking at the SPDX line would get > this license wrong. A new label needs to be defined and documented. Should be pretty mechanical to do, but that should see a wider audience than the powerpc hackers :-) Segher
