Bug#606520: linux-tools-2.6.36: /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 links against openssl but copyright lists only GPLv2 without exceptions

2010-12-10 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 09:08 +0200, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk writes: I have no idea what the upstream developers intended, they seem a bit clueless about distribution. I only just realised that they try to use libbfd (GPLv3, incompatible) even though

Bug#606520: linux-tools-2.6.36: /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 links against openssl but copyright lists only GPLv2 without exceptions

2010-12-09 Thread Timo Juhani Lindfors
Package: linux-tools-2.6.36 Version: 2.6.36-1~experimental.1 Severity: serious /usr/share/doc/linux-tools-2.6.36/copyright gives me the impression that we have a license to distribute /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 only under the terms of the GPLv2. Is this correct? It seems that perf_2.6.36 uses openssl:

Bug#606520: linux-tools-2.6.36: /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 links against openssl but copyright lists only GPLv2 without exceptions

2010-12-09 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 23:36 +0200, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: Package: linux-tools-2.6.36 Version: 2.6.36-1~experimental.1 Severity: serious /usr/share/doc/linux-tools-2.6.36/copyright gives me the impression that we have a license to distribute /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 only under the terms

Bug#606520: linux-tools-2.6.36: /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 links against openssl but copyright lists only GPLv2 without exceptions

2010-12-09 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 03:36 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 23:36 +0200, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: Package: linux-tools-2.6.36 Version: 2.6.36-1~experimental.1 Severity: serious /usr/share/doc/linux-tools-2.6.36/copyright gives me the impression that we have a

Bug#606520: linux-tools-2.6.36: /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 links against openssl but copyright lists only GPLv2 without exceptions

2010-12-09 Thread Timo Juhani Lindfors
Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk writes: I have no idea what the upstream developers intended, they seem a bit clueless about distribution. I only just realised that they try to use libbfd (GPLv3, incompatible) even though perf can get the same functionality from libiberty (GPLv2)! Hmm,

Bug#606520: linux-tools-2.6.36: /usr/bin/perf_2.6.36 links against openssl but copyright lists only GPLv2 without exceptions

2010-12-09 Thread Timo Juhani Lindfors
Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk writes: Since perf doesn't use any of the functionality in libssl via Python, I'm not convinced there's a problem here. Good. Would it be appropriate to describe this in copyright file though? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to