IANAL
I think that it would be possible to say something like:
While hwloc is BSD licensed, it may potentially link to libraries with
more restrictive license terms.
However, that is more or less true of ANY software.
For instance, if I compile some BSD licensed software on AIX with '-static'
then IBM's libc ends up in my binary.
I am not saying that IBM's libc poses any specific issues, just using it as
an example.
So, this is in no way a unique situation for hwloc.
I think that if hwloc were to explicitly list libpci then we start a
dangerous precedent under which users may expect us to continuously "audit"
the libs used on various systems.
-Paul
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
<jsquyres_at_[hidden]>wrote:
> It was just pointed out to me that libpci is licensed under the GPL (not
> the LGPL).
>
> Hence, even though hwloc is BSD, if it links to libpci.*, it's tainted.
>
> IANAL, this is not legal advice, yadda yadda yadda. But does this jive
> with other peoples' understanding?
>
> This has caused a problem for an unnamed vendor who wanted to ship a
> binary tool that linked against libhwloc (that linked against libpci).
> Yoinks.
>
> The complaint to me was that hwloc needs to be clearer about this in its
> documentation.
>
> Does this sound right?
>
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquyres_at_[hidden]
> For corporate legal information go to:
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>
--
Paul H. Hargrove PHHargrove_at_[hidden]
Future Technologies Group
Computer and Data Sciences Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
|
![[Flag]](../../../../../community/mirrors/flag-us.gif){kind=small}