From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Matt W. Benjamin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ceph.spec.in: Fix license to GPL-2.0 and use SPDX format Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 23:59:46 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <297035103.352.1338955186927.JavaMail.root@thunderbeast.private.linuxbox.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from aa.linuxbox.com ([134.215.213.37]:1024 "EHLO aa.linuxbox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750908Ab2FFEFN (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 00:05:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Holger Macht That wouldn't seem to make a lot of sense, no. Matt ----- "Sage Weil" wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Holger Macht wrote: > > Minor spec file fix. LGPLv2 in spec file is not correct, because > some of > > the included packages/binaries are GPLv2. For example: > > > > src/os/btrfs_ioctl.h -> package ceph, binary ceph-osd > > My understanding is that including a header file (in this case, to get > the > ioctl number) does not create a derivative work. Is that incorrect? > -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://linuxbox.com tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309