Hi Karl, Thank *you* for the quick response. The AND implies that the package contains both LGPLv3.0 and BSD-licensed code (in particular e.g. Rich Felker's getopt shim) - it is not dual-licensed. However, for all intents and purposes I hereby grant the GNU Project permission to use it in any GPLv2 licensed package.
The "spiritual" connection primarily lies in the algorithmic matters: bzip3 is actually more similar to bzip than bzip2 - the former being abandoned due to patent issues on arithmetic coding, which are not a problem nowadays. Both codecs are statistical and make use of the Burrows-Wheeler transform. Hence, bzip3 really stands for Burrows-wheeler ZIP, but versions one and two were taken. To my knowledge, Julian does not have a trademark on the bzip series, which itself doesn't seem to infringe the IP of Katz' original PKZIP. -- Yours, Kamila Szewczyk On 10/14/24 12:03 AM, Karl Berry wrote: > Hi Kamila - thanks much for the patch. > > % wc -c *tar* > 1885428 automake-1.17.0.91.tar.bz2 > 1500817 automake-1.17.0.91.tar.bz3 > 2456935 automake-1.17.0.91.tar.gz > 1641112 automake-1.17.0.91.tar.xz > > That is an impressive compression ratio. > > LGPLv3-licensed > > I searched for bzip3 on pkgs.org and it said the license was > LGPL-3.0-or-later AND BSD-2-Clause. Which is good, if true, because > LGPLv3 is not compatible with GPLv2-only. > https://rhel.pkgs.org/9/epel-x86_64/bzip3-1.3.1-1.el9.x86_64.rpm.html > > But main.c only says LGPLv3, so I'm not sure what to make of that. > Can you clarify? Not that it's a stopper. > > Also not a stopper, but I just wonder, what is the relationship to > bzip3? It seems there is, basically, none. I presume you are not Julian > Seward by another name :). I don't understand the "spiritual" > connection, sorry. But it's surely too late to rename it anyway, so it > doesn't matter. > > Thanks again, > Karl
