libcdaudio license issue

libcdaudio license issue

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
recipe says GPL
COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
README file says:

libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
License, included in this package under the top level source directory
in the file COPYING

C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later

What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?

Frans

Re: libcdaudio license issue

[Maupin, Chase]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org
> [mailto:openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of
> Frans Meulenbroeks
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 1:48 PM
> To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; poky@yoctoproject.org
> Subject: [oe] libcdaudio license issue
> 
> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
> recipe says GPL
> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
> README file says:
> 
> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
> in the file COPYING
> 
> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
> 
> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?

Frans,

My thought would be to follow what is in the code.  Some files can be autogenerated by tools like automake and if someone doesn't set the up right then they get the wrong output.  But the code is usually what someone has written and what they intended.

Anyone else have a differing opinion?

> 
> Frans
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Re: libcdaudio license issue

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 08:48:28PM +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
> recipe says GPL
> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
> README file says:
> 
> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
> in the file COPYING
> 
> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
> 
> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?

Frans,

I'd agree that LGPLv2+ is a safe bet, especially since that's what is 
specified in the sources.

-- 
Denys

Re: [oe] libcdaudio license issue

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 08:48:28PM +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
> recipe says GPL
> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
> README file says:
> 
> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
> in the file COPYING
> 
> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
> 
> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?

Frans,

I'd agree that LGPLv2+ is a safe bet, especially since that's what is 
specified in the sources.

-- 
Denys

Re: [poky] libcdaudio license issue

[Saul Wold]

On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
> recipe says GPL
> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
> README file says:
>
> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
> in the file COPYING
>
> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>
> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>
This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the 
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.


Sau!

> Frans
> _______________________________________________
> poky mailing list
> poky@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/poky
>

Re: libcdaudio license issue

[Saul Wold]

On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
> recipe says GPL
> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
> README file says:
>
> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
> in the file COPYING
>
> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>
> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>
This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the 
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.


Sau!

> Frans
> _______________________________________________
> poky mailing list
> poky@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/poky
>

Re: [poky] libcdaudio license issue

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>> recipe says GPL
>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>> README file says:
>>
>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>> in the file COPYING
>>
>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>
>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>
> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the 
> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.

Saul,

We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to port 
it from Poky though! :)

-- 
Denys

Re: [oe] libcdaudio license issue

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>> recipe says GPL
>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>> README file says:
>>
>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>> in the file COPYING
>>
>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>
>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>
> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the 
> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.

Saul,

We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to port 
it from Poky though! :)

-- 
Denys

Re: [poky] libcdaudio license issue

[Saul Wold]

On 12/06/2010 02:52 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
>> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>>> recipe says GPL
>>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>>> README file says:
>>>
>>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>>> in the file COPYING
>>>
>>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>>
>>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>>
>> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the
>> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.
>
> Saul,
>
> We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to port
> it from Poky though! :)
>
Denys, sorry I saw this via my poky email and did not notice it was OE 
also, I will what what I cross post next time!

Glad to hear that you like the idea!  We will have all Poky recipes 
checksummed this week!

Sau!

Re: [oe] libcdaudio license issue

[Saul Wold]

On 12/06/2010 02:52 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
>> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>>> recipe says GPL
>>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>>> README file says:
>>>
>>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>>> in the file COPYING
>>>
>>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>>
>>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>>
>> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the
>> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.
>
> Saul,
>
> We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to port
> it from Poky though! :)
>
Denys, sorry I saw this via my poky email and did not notice it was OE 
also, I will what what I cross post next time!

Glad to hear that you like the idea!  We will have all Poky recipes 
checksummed this week!

Sau!

Re: [poky] libcdaudio license issue

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

Replying to 3 replies in this one


2010/12/7 Saul Wold <saul.wold@intel.com>:
> On 12/06/2010 02:52 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>>>> recipe says GPL
>>>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>>>> README file says:
>>>>
>>>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>>>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>>>> in the file COPYING
>>>>
>>>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>>>
>>>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>>>
>>> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the
>>> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.

Yes, I'm aware of this. Would you want to add all the header chunks
that state this, or only e.g. the most important one (assuming such a
file can be identified)
I've seen the text in different files.

Also is poky planning to take this recipe? If not, it is kind-a
pointless for me to update it, so I'd rather waste time on something
else :-)
>>
>> Saul,
>>
>> We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to
>> port
>> it from Poky though! :)

Note that adding/using  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM in OE should be harmless as
it is a var, which is not used.
So if we wnat to move into that dir we might consider keeping the
field in the OE recipes (currently for libaudio it is not there)
>>
> Denys, sorry I saw this via my poky email and did not notice it was OE also,
> I will what what I cross post next time!

The recipe is also in OE and of course suffers from the same issue.
That's why I posted to both lists.
>
> Glad to hear that you like the idea!  We will have all Poky recipes
> checksummed this week!

Cool!

Frans

Re: [oe] libcdaudio license issue

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

Replying to 3 replies in this one


2010/12/7 Saul Wold <saul.wold@intel.com>:
> On 12/06/2010 02:52 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>>>> recipe says GPL
>>>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>>>> README file says:
>>>>
>>>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>>>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>>>> in the file COPYING
>>>>
>>>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>>>
>>>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>>>
>>> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the
>>> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.

Yes, I'm aware of this. Would you want to add all the header chunks
that state this, or only e.g. the most important one (assuming such a
file can be identified)
I've seen the text in different files.

Also is poky planning to take this recipe? If not, it is kind-a
pointless for me to update it, so I'd rather waste time on something
else :-)
>>
>> Saul,
>>
>> We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to
>> port
>> it from Poky though! :)

Note that adding/using  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM in OE should be harmless as
it is a var, which is not used.
So if we wnat to move into that dir we might consider keeping the
field in the OE recipes (currently for libaudio it is not there)
>>
> Denys, sorry I saw this via my poky email and did not notice it was OE also,
> I will what what I cross post next time!

The recipe is also in OE and of course suffers from the same issue.
That's why I posted to both lists.
>
> Glad to hear that you like the idea!  We will have all Poky recipes
> checksummed this week!

Cool!

Frans

Re: libcdaudio license issue

[Scott Garman]

On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
> recipe says GPL
> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
> README file says:
>
> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
> in the file COPYING
>
> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>
> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?

Like others I agree with going with what the source files have in them.

Maybe this is obvious, but since I don't think anyone else has mentioned 
it, I think it would also be helpful to notify the upstream folks about 
this ambiguity so they can correct it.

Regards,

Scott

-- 
Scott Garman
sgarman at zenlinux dot com

Re: libcdaudio license issue

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/12/7 Scott Garman <sgarman@zenlinux.com>:
> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>
>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>> recipe says GPL
>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>> README file says:
>>
>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>> in the file COPYING
>>
>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>
>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>
> Like others I agree with going with what the source files have in them.
>
> Maybe this is obvious, but since I don't think anyone else has mentioned it,
> I think it would also be helpful to notify the upstream folks about this
> ambiguity so they can correct it.

Good remark.
However, the project seems dead. Last post on the users mailing list
is from sep 2008 or so.
There seems also to be an app in the zip (cdcd) maybe the gplv2
applies to that one.
Will peek at it when I have more time, really need to zzz now)

Frans

Re: [poky] libcdaudio license issue

[Saul Wold]

On 12/07/2010 01:23 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> Replying to 3 replies in this one
>
>
> 2010/12/7 Saul Wold<saul.wold@intel.com>:
>> On 12/06/2010 02:52 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>>>>> recipe says GPL
>>>>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>>>>> README file says:
>>>>>
>>>>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>>>>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>>>>> in the file COPYING
>>>>>
>>>>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>>>>
>>>>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>>>>
>>>> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the
>>>> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.
>
> Yes, I'm aware of this. Would you want to add all the header chunks
> that state this, or only e.g. the most important one (assuming such a
> file can be identified)
> I've seen the text in different files.
>

I would suggest the most important one as mostly those headers would be 
the same. Picking something like a common header file or the file that 
contains main() would make sense.

> Also is poky planning to take this recipe? If not, it is kind-a
> pointless for me to update it, so I'd rather waste time on something
> else :-)

At this point I think the work you are doing is valuable but better 
suited to live in a layer.  The core is really targeted to be as generic 
as possible to allow for a broad variety of devices.

Richard recently suggested that a repo be created for such meta layers. 
We are working out the details on creating and opening up that repo.

Sau!

>>>
>>> Saul,
>>>
>>> We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to
>>> port
>>> it from Poky though! :)
>
> Note that adding/using  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM in OE should be harmless as
> it is a var, which is not used.
> So if we wnat to move into that dir we might consider keeping the
> field in the OE recipes (currently for libaudio it is not there)
>>>
>> Denys, sorry I saw this via my poky email and did not notice it was OE also,
>> I will what what I cross post next time!
>
> The recipe is also in OE and of course suffers from the same issue.
> That's why I posted to both lists.
>>
>> Glad to hear that you like the idea!  We will have all Poky recipes
>> checksummed this week!
>
> Cool!
>
> Frans
>

Re: [oe] libcdaudio license issue

[Saul Wold]

On 12/07/2010 01:23 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> Replying to 3 replies in this one
>
>
> 2010/12/7 Saul Wold<saul.wold@intel.com>:
>> On 12/06/2010 02:52 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 02:50:10PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/06/2010 11:48 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I was checking libcdaudio for LICENSE info.
>>>>> recipe says GPL
>>>>> COPYING file is the GPLv2 one
>>>>> README file says:
>>>>>
>>>>> libcdaudio is distributed under the GNU Library General Public
>>>>> License, included in this package under the top level source directory
>>>>> in the file COPYING
>>>>>
>>>>> C files also mention LGPL. but say v2 or later
>>>>>
>>>>> What to do with this in the LICENSE field? LGPLv2+ ?
>>>>>
>>>> This seems reasonable, you should also include the header chunk in the
>>>> LIC_FILES_CHKSUM, you can specify start and end lines for the checksum.
>
> Yes, I'm aware of this. Would you want to add all the header chunks
> that state this, or only e.g. the most important one (assuming such a
> file can be identified)
> I've seen the text in different files.
>

I would suggest the most important one as mostly those headers would be 
the same. Picking something like a common header file or the file that 
contains main() would make sense.

> Also is poky planning to take this recipe? If not, it is kind-a
> pointless for me to update it, so I'd rather waste time on something
> else :-)

At this point I think the work you are doing is valuable but better 
suited to live in a layer.  The core is really targeted to be as generic 
as possible to allow for a broad variety of devices.

Richard recently suggested that a repo be created for such meta layers. 
We are working out the details on creating and opening up that repo.

Sau!

>>>
>>> Saul,
>>>
>>> We don't have this feature in OpenEmbedded yet... But it would be nice to
>>> port
>>> it from Poky though! :)
>
> Note that adding/using  LIC_FILES_CHKSUM in OE should be harmless as
> it is a var, which is not used.
> So if we wnat to move into that dir we might consider keeping the
> field in the OE recipes (currently for libaudio it is not there)
>>>
>> Denys, sorry I saw this via my poky email and did not notice it was OE also,
>> I will what what I cross post next time!
>
> The recipe is also in OE and of course suffers from the same issue.
> That's why I posted to both lists.
>>
>> Glad to hear that you like the idea!  We will have all Poky recipes
>> checksummed this week!
>
> Cool!
>
> Frans
>


-- 
     Sau!

Saul Wold
Yocto Component Wrangler @ Intel
Yocto Project / Poky Build System