n 30/07/2013, at 2:06 AM, Ondřej Bílka wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:10:42PM +0100, Marcus Shawcroft wrote: >> On 28/07/13 23:03, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >>> While verifying license compliance for GCC and its libraries I noticed that >>> several libgcc files that end up in the final library are licensed under >>> GPL-3.0+ instead of GPL-3.0-with-GCC-exception. >>> >>> This is, obviously, was not the intention of developers who just copied >>> wrong boilerplate text, and this patch fixes the oversights. >>> > To be sure it would be good idea to have check for this issue. > First question is which files need copyright exception? > > Second is which files actually have this license. > As first approximation I used: > > git grep "Section 7 of GPL version 3" > > Is that list full or did I missed something?
I used fossology's nomos license checker. The license checker can be run standalone and outputs a list of licenses a given file has (install fossology 2.2 or later and you can run "/usr/share/fossology/nomos/agent/nomos <list of files>"). We could add a post-commit hook that sends a warning to the mailing list if a new or changed file under libgcc, libstdc++, etc. has a more restrictive license than intended for these libraries (e.g., GPLv3 without exception). -- Maxim Kuvyrkov www.kugelworks.com
