linux-kernel - Re: Which SPDX Identifier for files without explicit GPL version

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181028141319.GA13215@kroah.com>
Date:   Sun, 28 Oct 2018 15:13:19 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Which SPDX Identifier for files without explicit GPL version

On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 02:22:40PM +0100, Michael Straube wrote:
> On 10/28/18 12:27 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 11:04:06AM +0100, Michael Straube wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > which GPL version should be used in SPDX Identifiers for files that
> > > are GPL licensed but do not mention any version? It is not clear to
> > > me after reading license-rules.rst.
> > > 
> > > For example:
> > > 
> > > /******************************************************************************
> > >   * Copyright(c) 2008 - 2010 Realtek Corporation. All rights reserved.
> > >   *
> > >   * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
> > >   * ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
> > >   * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License for
> > >   * more details.
> > >   *
> > >   * The full GNU General Public License is included in this distribution in the
> > >   * file called LICENSE.
> > 
> > Perhaps look up what version of the GPL that was originally contained in
> > the tarball that this driver was bundled with?  I think that should be
> > on their website somewhere...
> > 
> > If not, it's v1, not a good thing, but all we have to go on.  Also, try
> > emailing:
> > 
> > >   * Contact Information:
> > >   * wlanfae <wlanfae@...ltek.com>
> > 
> > That address :)
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> > 
> 
> Ah, there is a file 'license' in the root directory of this driver (rtl8192e)
> that I overlooked. It contains GPLv2. So v2 applies to all files with the above
> shortened boiler plate?

Yes.  So add a SPDX line to the file and delete the boiler plate text so
we don't have this question again in the future.  Then delete that opy
of the GPL so we don't have files we don't need :)

thanks,

greg k-h