From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 07:58:02 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1 In-Reply-To: <20180606040131.drvicwte22lzicad@sapphire.tkos.co.il> References: <20180605221634.3a53fa0b@windsurf> <20180606040131.drvicwte22lzicad@sapphire.tkos.co.il> Message-ID: <20180606075802.3f397dd9@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 07:01:31 +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: > > because the license text itself refers to Peter Wemm. > > The libbsd COPYING fine appends the copyright holder to a number of common > licenses like BSD-3-clause-John-Birrell and BSD-4-clause-Niels-Provos. That's > probably because each COPYING entry lists specific files with their copyright > holders. Correct. > We usually only use the SPDX identifier string. So I don't think > there is a reason to do that for this license. Well, normally an SPDX identifier string refers to a specific version of the license. If the license text is different (even for subtle reasons), the SPDX identifier string should probably be different. > > Yocto is really using a longer list of licenses: > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/plain/meta/recipes-support/libbsd/libbsd_0.8.7.bb > > The full list is only in a comment, AFAICS. True, indeed, I had missed that. > The actual effective line is > rather shorter than what we have following this patch: > > LICENSE = "BSD-4-Clause & ISC & PD" I also think it is good enough. But I wanted to point out that the licensing is in fact a bit more complicated. I personally don't see the need of having a more detailed LIBBSD_LICENSE description, but I wanted to point this out so that others can comment on this (Arnout, Yann, Peter). Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com