i2c-tools: library licensing issues

i2c-tools: library licensing issues

[Aurelien Jarno]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1010 bytes --]

Hi,

I have been reviewing the i2c-tools licensing, and it seems there is a
contradiction between README and lib/smbus.c about the library
licensing:

From README:
| The library is released under the LGPL version 2.1 or later, while most
| tools are released under the GPL version 2 or later, but there are a few
| exceptions.

From lib/smbus.c:
| This program 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 of the License, or
| (at your option) any later version.

On the other hand, the license in lib/Module.mk matches the one from
README.

I guess one of README or lib/smbus.c has to be fixed. Can someone
clarify that? In meantime I think the library as a whole should be
considered as GPL v2 or later.

Thanks,
Aurelien

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: i2c-tools: library licensing issues

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Aurélien,

On Sat, 25 Nov 2017 17:47:17 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> I have been reviewing the i2c-tools licensing, and it seems there is a
> contradiction between README and lib/smbus.c about the library
> licensing:
> 
> From README:
> | The library is released under the LGPL version 2.1 or later, while most
> | tools are released under the GPL version 2 or later, but there are a few
> | exceptions.
> 
> From lib/smbus.c:
> | This program 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 of the License, or
> | (at your option) any later version.
> 
> On the other hand, the license in lib/Module.mk matches the one from
> README.
> 
> I guess one of README or lib/smbus.c has to be fixed. Can someone
> clarify that? In meantime I think the library as a whole should be
> considered as GPL v2 or later.

Thanks for pointing out this inconsistency, which I missed. 


-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support