Bruno Haible <[email protected]> writes:
>> Module License File License File name
>> ================= ================= =====================================
>> GPL LGPLv2+ lib/issymlinkat.h
>> GPL LGPLv2+ lib/openat2.c
>
> Both files are intentionally under LGPLv2+, because they are
> system-call related stuff. It's only because of some other module
> dependencies (in particular 'save-cwd' or 'openat') that the modules
> are under GPL.
Ah, I see. That makes sense. I guess it would need a similar manual
exclude in 'check-copyright' like glob already has. I'll have a look at
that later.
>> LGPL LGPLv3+ or GPLv2+ lib/str-kmp.h
>
> I think this file was meant to be used from libunistring modules...
Makes sense. The file is included directly in other modules under a
single compatible liscence. So the 'check-copyright' script can probably
special case it.
>> LGPLv2+ LGPL lib/strncpy.c
>
> This one looks like a recent mistake of mine. If you could correct it, please?
Oh, I think I see what happened. You added this module on 2025-12-02 to
work around the FreeBSD bug. The commit message says the code was based
on the LGPL 'wcsncpy' module. However, using an LGPL license in the
module description will cause the following:
$ gnulib-tool --create-testdir --dir testdir1
gnulib-tool: warning: module crypto/gc-rijndael depends on a module with an
incompatible license: strncpy
gnulib-tool: warning: module crypto/rijndael depends on a module with an
incompatible license: strncpy
[...]
Are you okay with licensing 'strncpy' under LGPLv2+? Since you wrote it
and 'wcsncpy', I don't think there should be any problems with it.
Collin
