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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BL1PR11MB54001A9B7367BD109A9B581D8959A@BL1PR11MB5400.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:44:38 +0000
From: "Zavras, Alexios" <alexios.zavras@...el.com>
To: Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>, "Maciej W. Rozycki"
	<macro@...am.me.uk>
CC: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, "Thomas
 Huth" <thuth@...hat.com>, Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>, "Michael
 Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Christophe Leroy
	<christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org"
	<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org>, J Lovejoy
	<opensource@...ayne.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc: Replace the obsolete address of the FSF

FYI, I've updated the definition of the SPDX "GNU-compiler-exception"
to include both variants of "compiled with GCC" and "compiled with a GNU compiler".
It will be published in the next release of the SPDX License List.

Therefore, it should be used to mark these files
(I think I counted 7 instances of this text in kernel files).

-- zvr --




________________________________________
From: Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2025 15:27
To: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@...am.me.uk>
Cc: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>; Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>; Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>; Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>; Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>; Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>; Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>; Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>; Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>; linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; kvm@...r.kernel.org <kvm@...r.kernel.org>; linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org <linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org>; J Lovejoy <opensource@...ayne.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc: Replace the obsolete address of the FSF


On Sat, Jul 12, 2025 at 6:48 PM Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@...am.me.uk> wrote:

>

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2025, Richard Fontana wrote:

>

> > > > while this one:

> > > >

> > > >  *    As a special exception, if you link this library with files

> > > >  *    compiled with GCC to produce an executable, this does not cause

> > > >  *    the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License.

> > > >  *    This exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why

> > > >  *    the executable file might be covered by the GNU General Public License.

> > > >

> > > > does not seem to be in the SPDX exception list. It is very similar to

> > > > `GNU-compiler-exception` except it specifically mentions GCC instead

> > > > of saying "a GNU compiler".

> > >

> > > https://spdx.org/licenses/GNU-compiler-exception.html

> > >

> > > is exactly this.

> >

> > No, because `GNU-compiler-exception` as defined here

> > https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/src/exceptions/GNU-compiler-exception.xml

> > assumes use of the term "GCC" rather than "a GNU compiler".

>

>  I don't know what the legal status of the statement referred is, however

> the original exception as published[1] by FSF says:

>

> '"GCC" means a version of the GNU Compiler Collection, with or without

> modifications, governed by version 3 (or a specified later version) of the

> GNU General Public License (GPL) with the option of using any subsequent

> versions published by the FSF.'



> which I think makes it clear that "GCC" is a collection of "GNU compilers"

> and therefore the two terms are synonymous to each other for the purpose

> of said exception (in the old days "GCC" stood for "GNU C Compiler", but

> the old meaning makes no sense anymore now that we have compilers for Ada,

> Fortran and many other languages included in GCC).

>

>  NB up to date versions of CRT code refer to the exception as published

> rather than pasting an old version of its text:

>

> 'Under Section 7 of GPL version 3, you are granted additional

> permissions described in the GCC Runtime Library Exception, version

> 3.1, as published by the Free Software Foundation.'

>

> References:

>

> [1] "GCC Runtime Library Exception", version 3.1,

>     <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-3.1.html>



I think we're basically talking past each other. The definition of

"GCC" in the GCC runtime library exception 3.1 is irrelevant because

that file does not refer to that exception. In SPDX, license (and

exception) identifiers are precisely defined. Unless I'm missing

something there is no official SPDX identifier that corresponds to

this text:



  As a special exception, if you link this library with files

  compiled with GCC to produce an executable, this does not cause

  the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License.

  This exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why

  the executable file might be covered by the GNU General Public License.



I'm not personally a major supporter of SPDX and I'm the last person

who would want to be associated with SPDX pedanticism but it's a

standard and if the Linux kernel project is going to use it IMO it

should conform to that standard, otherwise you're basically making ad

hoc definitions of pseudo-SPDX expressions or redefinitions of

already-defined SPDX identifiers, which seems to defeat the purpose of

using SPDX expressions at all. Under that standard, there is currently

no SPDX identifier representing the above text (as far as I can tell).

The solution is either to propose a modification of

`GNU-compiler-exception` so that "GCC" is accepted as an alternative

to "a GNU compiler", or to propose a new exception to be added to

SPDX's exception list, or to use a custom-defined `AdditionRef-`

identifier.



Richard





Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
Managing Directors: Sean Fennelly, Jeffrey Schneiderman, Tiffany Doon Silva
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ