I will start a separate conversation of UTM's license compatibility. Regarding the patch, would some sort of warning message in configure (if building as a shared library) regarding the license be wise? Or would it pollute the output logs?
-j On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 7:46 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 04:41:06PM +0200, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 04:29:33PM -0700, Joelle van Dyne wrote: > > > > From: osy <os...@users.noreply.github.com> > > > > > > > > On iOS, we cannot fork() new processes, so the best way to load QEMU > > > > into an > > > > app is through a shared library. We add a new configure option > > > > `--enable-shared-lib` that will build the bulk of QEMU into a shared > > > > lib. > > > > The usual executables will then link to the library. > > > > > > Note that QEMU as a combined work is licensed GPLv2-only, so if an app is > > > linking to it as a shared library, the application's license has to be > > > GPLv2 compatible. I fear that shipping as a shared library is an easy way > > > for apps to get into a license violating situation without realizing. > > > > Please don't let that be an obstacle in merging this series. They'll do it > > anyway as seen here so having it upstream is probably better than having a > > lot of different/divergent forks. > > "They'll violate the license anyway" is not a compelling argument. > > > In case of UTM it seems to be licensed under Apache License 2.0: > > > > https://github.com/utmapp/UTM/blob/master/LICENSE > > > > which FSF says not compatible with GPLv2 but it is with GPLv3: > > > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2 > > > > Not sure however if that's for using Apache licenced part in GPLv2 code or > > the other way around like in UTM in which case I think the whole work will > > effectively become GPLv3 as most parts of QEMU is probably GPLv2+ already or > > BSD like free that should be possible to combine with only files explicitely > > GPLv2 in QEMU remaining at that license and UTM parts are Apache 2.0 when > > separated from QEMU. I have no idea about legal stuff whatsoever but > > combining two free software components should be legal some way (otherwise > > it's not possible to combine GPLv2 with GPLv3 either). > > You need to distinguish between GPLv2-only and GPLv2-or-later. > > GPLv2-or-later is fine as that upgrades to GPLv3 when used in a > combined work with Apache License or GPLv3 software. > > GPLv2-only will, by design, *not* upgrade to newer GPL versions > when combined - it is simply license incompatible. > > QEMU unfortunately has a bunch a GPLv2-only code present that we > cannot eliminate. > > Regards, > Daniel > -- > |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| > |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| > |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| >
