On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Holger Macht wrote: > Minor spec file fix. LGPLv2 in spec file is not correct, because some of > the included packages/binaries are GPLv2. For example: > > src/os/btrfs_ioctl.h -> package ceph, binary ceph-osd
My understanding is that including a header file (in this case, to get the ioctl number) does not create a derivative work. Is that incorrect? > src/mount/mtab.c -> package ceph, binary mount.ceph > src/common/fiemap.cc -> package ceph, binary rbd > > Also use SPDX format: http://www.spdx.org/licenses > > Signed-off-by: Holger Macht <[email protected]> > --- > ceph.spec.in | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/ceph.spec.in b/ceph.spec.in > index 81e7040..3b3026d 100644 > --- a/ceph.spec.in > +++ b/ceph.spec.in > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ Name: ceph > Version: @VERSION@ > Release: 6%{?dist} > Summary: User space components of the Ceph file system > -License: LGPLv2 > +License: GPL-2.0 So this is effectively the most restrictive license in the package? Thanks- sage > Group: System Environment/Base > URL: http://ceph.newdream.net/ > Source0: http://ceph.newdream.net/download/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 > -- > 1.7.9.5 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
