From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44286) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gtzJC-0004eK-M3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:30:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gtzJB-0007fQ-Nt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:30:58 -0500 References: <1550073299-3647-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> <1cbe8721-ea9e-f17f-f27d-910fece2858d@redhat.com> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <9518f0a6-2a89-ab4f-a431-d4e4741db8e5@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 19:30:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1cbe8721-ea9e-f17f-f27d-910fece2858d@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] crypto: Fix LGPL information in the file headers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "=?UTF-8?Q?Daniel_P._Berrang=c3=a9?=" Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org On 2019-02-13 17:24, Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 wrote: > On 2/13/19 4:54 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: >> It's either "GNU *Library* General Public License version 2" or "GNU >> Lesser General Public License version *2.1*", but there was no "versio= n >> 2.0" of the "Lesser" license. So assume that version 2.1 is meant here= . >> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth >> --- >> crypto/block-luks.c | 2 +- >> crypto/block-luks.h | 2 +- >> crypto/block-qcow.c | 2 +- >> crypto/block-qcow.h | 2 +- >> crypto/block.c | 2 +- >> crypto/blockpriv.h | 2 +- >> crypto/cipher-builtin.c | 2 +- >> crypto/cipher-gcrypt.c | 2 +- >> crypto/cipher-nettle.c | 2 +- >> crypto/cipher.c | 2 +- >> crypto/hash-gcrypt.c | 2 +- >> crypto/hash-glib.c | 2 +- >> crypto/hash-nettle.c | 2 +- >> crypto/hash.c | 2 +- >> crypto/init.c | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen-essiv.c | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen-essiv.h | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen-plain.c | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen-plain.h | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen-plain64.c | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen-plain64.h | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgen.c | 2 +- >> crypto/ivgenpriv.h | 2 +- >> crypto/pbkdf-gcrypt.c | 2 +- >> crypto/pbkdf-nettle.c | 2 +- >> crypto/pbkdf-stub.c | 2 +- >> crypto/pbkdf.c | 2 +- >> crypto/random-gcrypt.c | 2 +- >> crypto/random-gnutls.c | 2 +- >> crypto/random-platform.c | 2 +- >> crypto/secret.c | 2 +- >> crypto/tlscreds.c | 2 +- >> crypto/tlscredsanon.c | 2 +- >> crypto/tlscredspriv.h | 2 +- >> crypto/tlscredspsk.c | 2 +- >> crypto/tlscredsx509.c | 2 +- >> crypto/tlssession.c | 2 +- >> crypto/xts.c | 2 +- >> include/crypto/block.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/cipher.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/hash.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/init.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/ivgen.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/pbkdf.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/random.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/secret.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/tlscreds.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/tlscredsanon.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/tlscredspsk.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/tlscredsx509.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/tlssession.h | 2 +- >> include/crypto/xts.h | 2 +- >> 52 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) >=20 > Still not convinced to use SPDX-License-Identifiers? SPDX sounds fine to me personally, but so far nobody came up with a proper official description if and how this can legally be done, so until we are at that point, fixing the current statements sounds like the best solution to me. Thomas