On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 05:53:01PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 11:28:30AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to
>> > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses.
>> >
>> > Update the drivers/usb/ and include/linux/usb* files with the correct
>> > SPDX license identifier based on the license text in the file itself.
>> > The SPDX identifier is a legally binding shorthand, which can be used
>> > instead of the full boiler plate text.
>> >
>> > This work is based on a script and data from Thomas Gleixner, Philippe
>> > Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart.
>> >
>> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
>> > Cc: Kate Stewart <[email protected]>
>> > Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <[email protected]>
>> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
>>
>> I noticed several MODULE_LICENSE macros which did not match the headers
>> (e.g. "GPL" being used for version 2 only modules) for which I'll send a
>> follow-up patch.
>>
>> Someone should probably write a script for that once the SPDX
>> identifiers are in.
>
> Yes, I think that someone might have a script for that, it will be much
> easier to detect these things now. The issue is that the "v2" marking
> came after the original "GPL" marking for MODULE_LICENSE() from what I
> remember, so many of those will be wrong.
If this can help my [1] tool can detect both header-level licenses-in-comments
as well as MODULE_LICENSE macros. Based on that we could reasonably
easily craft a script that scans a file and report discrepancies
between the two.
FWIW this is the same tool that has been used to provide some input to Greg to
clean things up here.
[1] https://github.com/nexB/scancode-toolkit
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
From 1583131705794482816@xxx Sat Nov 04 10:40:47 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1583040392971287449
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread