Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 126466 - librpm should be LGPL
librpm should be LGPL
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: rpm (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jeff Johnson
: FutureFeature
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2004-06-21 22:59 EDT by Nathan Robertson
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:10 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-06-24 05:56:31 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Nathan Robertson 2004-06-21 22:59:06 EDT
Description of problem:
I'm currently working on a proprietary product, which is written in C,
which would like to query the RPM database at startup to find out
whether a particular third party package (Sun's j2re Java Runtime, in
our case) is installed, and if so, where certain files are (their
location changes by release). This massively simplifies the setup of
our product from an end user perspective.

I have working code which queries librpm for the information, but
can't use it because librpm is GPL. Really, any product (GPL
compatible or otherwise) should be allowed to look up the RPM database
in this way, as it simplifies the user experience greatly.

On Windows we look up registry keys for this information (Sun set
these keys during the JRE installation), and on RPM based
distributions have useful information in the RPM database. Please give
us the ability to look up librpm programatically in GPL incompatible
products (for which RHEL, which we are planning to explicitly support,
is marketed to this audience).
Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2004-06-23 09:34:17 EDT
librpm *is* LGPL, always has been.
Comment 2 Nathan Robertson 2004-06-23 23:32:11 EDT
If that's the case, then why does "rpm -qi rpm" report it as GPL? (quoting off a Red Hat 9 
box below, because the FC2 box we have is on another network).

[nathanr@lnx bugzilla-2.16.5]$ rpm -qi rpm
Name        : rpm                          Relocations: (not relocateable)
Version     : 4.2                               Vendor: Red Hat, Inc.
Release     : 0.69                          Build Date: Fri 28 Feb 2003 08:24:23 EST
Install Date: Mon 13 Oct 2003 14:08:03 EST      Build Host: stripples.devel.redhat.com
Group       : System Environment/Base       Source RPM: rpm-4.2-0.69.src.rpm
Size        : 4718370                          License: GPL
Signature   : DSA/SHA1, Fri 28 Feb 2003 08:26:49 EST, Key ID 219180cddb42a60e
Packager    : Red Hat, Inc. <http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
Summary     : The RPM package management system.
Description :
The RPM Package Manager (RPM) is a powerful command line driven
package management system capable of installing, uninstalling,
verifying, querying, and updating software packages. Each software
package consists of an archive of files along with information about
the package like its version, a description, etc.
Comment 3 Jeff Johnson 2004-06-24 05:56:31 EDT
rpm has 3 licenses, GPL, LGPL, and X11. There's also another
license for embedded elfutils these days.

The intent for librpm has always been LGPL, and that
is the license that applies.

Check with the Red Hat lawyers rather than rpm -qi
if you don't believe me.

Yes, very confusing, can't be helped.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.