On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 01:21:12PM +1100, Ian McWilliam wrote: > > On 24/10/2009, at 9:32 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > >On 2009/10/16 10:06, Ian McWilliam wrote: > > > >>-SHARED_LIBS= smbclient 1.0 \ > >>+SHARED_LIBS = smbclient 1.0 \ > > > >has anyone checked if this needs a bump? > > > >># GPLv2+ > > > >samba 3.2 and later are GPLv3+ > > > >from a quick look over the packages which depend on libsmbclient, > >gvfs/vfs2 are ok because they're LGPL which includes rights to > >relicense under GPLv2+ > > > > "3. You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General > >Public > > License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library. > >To do > > this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so > > that they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, > >version 2, > > instead of to this License." > > > >unless I'm mistaken (I only had a quick look but I think it's right..) > >kde/base3 is GPL v2 *only* so kde/base3 would either have to be marked > >PERMIT_PACKAGE_*=No or kdesamba would have to be removed or split to > >a separately built port (I don't think there's a way to mark a single > >subpackage PERMIT=No). > > > > > > > Yay, doggie doo GPL minefield ahead. Stuart seems correct. > > KDE have specific rev number of the GPL - Version 2, June 1991 > > http://websvn.kde.org/*checkout*/tags/KDE/3.5.10/kdebase/COPYING?revision=849627 > http://websvn.kde.org/*checkout*/tags/KDE/4.3.2/kdebase/COPYING > > which in validates this clause of the shipped GPL > > 9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new > versions > of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will > be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to > address new problems or concerns. > > Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program > specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any > later version", you have the option of following the terms and > conditions > either of that version or of any later version published by the Free > Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version > number of > this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free > Software > Foundation. > > > I bet 99% of linux distros shipping KDE and Samba are shipping > som'thn' they shouldn't due to > the so called Free software license called the GPL................
I doubt (and no need to resort on licence bashing ..).. debian (as an example) has a strict policy on that, looking in debian-devel or debian-legal ml archives could help. And it seems each kde component has specific licences : http://developer.kde.org/documentation/licensing/licensing.html kioslave/smb -> Modified BSD for KDE (dunno if it's up2date) Landry
