>>>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012, Richard Yao wrote: > Dear Everyone, sys-libs/glibc contains LICENSE="LGPL-2", but it > would appear to be subject to roughly a dozen licenses, many of > which are not in the tree?
> http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=LICENSES;h=80f7f1487947f57815b9fe076fadc8c7f94eeb8e;hb=HEAD > I can spot BSD-4, ISC and sun-rpc. There is also a license that > intel-ucode, but has had the provisions changed. There are also > numerous other licenses that I am seeing for the first time. I see the following (by quickly looking at it with the naked eye, so it should be redone more thorougly, in order not to miss any differences): BSD (line 9, originally BSD-4 but 3rd clause removed) HPND (line 41) ISC (line 63) BSD (line 80) HPND (line 113) BSD (line 141) BSD (line 168) "The Inner Net License, Version 2.00" (line 204) LGPL-2.1+ (line 242) LGPL-2.1+ (line 251) "LGPL" (line 271, no version specified) ISOC-rfc (line 279) BSD (line 320) HPND (line 349) rc (line 371) "PCRE" (line 394) "preserve notice" style (line 435) "preserve notice" style (line 444) LGPL-2.1+ (line 453) We're essentially missing "The Inner Net License, Version 2.00" and "PCRE" which however both look like Free Software licenses. The only one that I would be worried about is ISOC-rfc, but it is preceded by an escape clause: "Derivative works need not be licensed under similar terms." > Does anyone have any thoughts on how we should handle this? Best if you file a bug, so that the issue can be properly tracked. Ulrich
