Re: "GNU Library General Public License, version 2.0" in "pkgsrc"

[Matthias Scheler <tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost>]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 07:44:07AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> "superceded" is not the same as "is textually and therefore legally the
> same".  So I would recommend that you run wdiff.  If they just changed
> the name of the license, then yes it's the same.  If there are changes
> in terms, then we should add it separately. 

I found more information here in the meantime:

        http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html#LGPL

Quoting this web page:

        Old versions of the GNU Lesser General Public License

            * GNU Lesser General Public License, version 2.1

        This license used to be called the GNU Library General Public License:

            * GNU LIbrary General Public License, version 2.0

> (I'm assuming you have an
> actual package that references the Library GPL 2.0, and that you've
> already checked with upstream that this isn't just confusion and they
> don't mean regular LGPL.)

I found out in the meantime that there are multiple packages which use
this license e.g. "glib2", "pango" or "atk". The "atk" packagae doesn't
define a license, the other two packages use "gnu-lgpl-v2". Based on
the above information from "www.gnu.org" I think this is correct.

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/