linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xfs: Use the correct style for SPDX License Identifier

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 10:41:58 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Nishad Kamdar <nishadkamdar@...il.com>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Use the correct style for SPDX License Identifier

On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 19:29 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 08:56:18AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 07:05:09PM +0530, Nishad Kamdar wrote:
> > > This patch corrects the SPDX License Identifier style in
> > > header files related to XFS File System support.
> > > For C header files Documentation/process/license-rules.rst
> > > mandates C-like comments (opposed to C source files where
> > > C++ style should be used).
> > > 
> > > Changes made by using a script provided by Joe Perches here:
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/7/46.
[]
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.h
[]
> > > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > > -// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ */
> > 
> > I thought we were supposed to use 'GPL-2.0-or-newer' because 'GPL-2.0+'
> > is deprecated in some newer version of the SPDX standard?
> > 
> > <shrug>
> 
> The kernel follows the "older" SPDX standard, but will accept either,
> it's up to the author.  It is all documented in LICENSES/ if people
> really want to make sure.

I think the kernel should prefer the "newer" SPDX standard
for any/all changes to these lines.
---
 LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 b/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0
index ff0812..c50f93 100644
--- a/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0
+++ b/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0
@@ -8,13 +8,13 @@ Usage-Guide:
   tag/value pairs into a comment according to the placement
   guidelines in the licensing rules documentation.
   For 'GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 only' use:
-    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
-  or
     SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+  or the deprecated alternative
+    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
   For 'GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or any later version' use:
-    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
-  or
     SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
+  or the deprecated alternative
+    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
 License-Text:
 
 		    GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE