Bug 1549106

Summary: Incorrect License information in RPM specfile
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Daniel Berrangé <berrange>
Component: qemu-kvm-rhevAssignee: Miroslav Rezanina <mrezanin>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Chao Yang <chayang>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 7.5CC: chayang, coli, ddepaula, hhuang, juzhang, michen, ngu, qzhang, virt-maint
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: qemu-kvm-rhev-2.12.0-2.el7 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1549108 1549315 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-11-01 11:04:15 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1549108, 1549315    

Description Daniel Berrangé 2018-02-26 12:15:12 UTC
Description of problem:
The qemu-kvm RPM spec currently says

   License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and BSD

which is nice, except it doesn't reflect reality.

 - Some of the source files are GPLv2-only
 - Many of the source files are MIT license (much of block/ and audio/ dirs)
 - The QEMU logo is CC-BY-3.0

In addition, per:

  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ?rd=Licensing/FAQ#How_should_I_handle_multiple_licensing_situations.3F

If you have GPLv2-only and GPLv2-or-later in the same package, then the License, should only say "GPLv2", no need to include "GPLv2+" also. I believe the same would apply for LGPLv2+, because the presence of GPLv2-only code forces LGPLv2+ to become GPLv2-only.

So I think the correct License statement would be

  License: GPLv2 and BSD and MIT and CC-BY

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
qemu-kvm-rhev-2.10.0-16.el7

Comment 5 Miroslav Rezanina 2018-05-16 07:50:38 UTC
Fix included in qemu-kvm-rhev-2.12.0-2.el7

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2018-11-01 11:04:15 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:3443