On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:14 PM Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 22:08, Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> wrote: >> Another tricky point is libraries such as gmp and nettle, which are >> now either LGPLv3 (and so problematic for signed firmware images, etc) >> or GPLv2 (and so problematic if somehow linked with proprietary code) >> >> meta-gplv2 solves that problem too by providing the last versions of >> gmp and nettle which could be distributed under LGPv2 (and the last >> version of gnutls which supports those older version of gmp and >> nettle). > > 'Solves that problem' is perhaps an unfortunate word choice; I wouldn't want > to revert to outdated versions of anything, but *especially* cryptographic > libraries and toolkits.
Right, we can all agree that meta-gplv2 is not ideal. I'm just trying to highlight the point that simply avoiding (L)GPLv3 isn't enough as it can force packages to use licenses which are problematic for other reasons. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-architecture mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture
