Re: Question about libffi OSS license

[Anthony Green <green at moxielogic dot com>]

Hi...

  I've already reached out to fossology, because I feel like they really
dumb down the licensing conversation.   I don't believe that they make any
distinction between 'runtime' and 'build time' files.  The libffi source
distribution includes GPLv3+ source files - for sure - but they are only
used as build or test tools.   The source code that goes into the
libffi binary library that you would link to your application contains no
GPL code or any code that is derived from any GPL sources.

The *.exp files that you reference just drive the testsuite, and are not
part of the libffi binary that you would distribute with your application.

I hope this helps.

AG


On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:02 AM, 정희철 <heecheol.jung@lginnotek.com> wrote:

> Dear libffi developers
>
>
>
> we use libffi v3.2.1 (QCT default) , but the following files have been
> confirmed to GPLv3+ when check with fossology
>
> files : target-libpath.exp,  wrapper.exp, libffi.exp,  call.exp
>
>
>
> The libffi page said libffi is freeware, and in Wikipedia, it said MIT
> license. what license should I apply?
>
> Also, if I should apply GPLv3+, can I delete those files for using libffi ?
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> heecheol.jung
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 상기 메일은 지정된 수신인만을 위한 것이며, 부정경쟁방지 및 영업비밀의 보호에 관한 법률을 포함하여
> 관계 법령에 따라 보호의 대상이 되는 영업비밀, 기밀정보 등을 포함하고 있을 수 있습니다.
> 본 문서에 포함된 정보의 전부 또는 일부를 무단으로 제3자에게 공개, 배포, 복사 또는 사용하는 것은 엄격히 금지됩니다.
> 본 메일이 잘못 전송된 경우, 발신인 또는 당사에 알려주시고, 본 메일을 즉시 삭제하여 주시기 바랍니다.
> The above message is intended solely for the named addressee and may
> contain
> information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected under
> applicable law. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution, copying or
> use of
> the information contained in this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by
> email
> and erase this communication immediately.
>