GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!

[Eric Sandeen]

Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:

> NOTE: Don't trust COPYING. Look at the source code itself.

So, I own xfsprogs.

source code itself only says things like:

 * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
 * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
 * published by the Free Software Foundation.

but then the included COPYING file says:

The library named "libhandle" and some specific header files (including
<xfs/xfs.h>) are licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License.

All other components are licensed under the GNU General Public License.

... and then COPYING includes the text of LGPL2.1 and GPL2, specifically.

I'll ask sgi for clarification but in the months while their lawyers go
read the GPLv3, does it look like it would be appropriate to assume
GPLv2 and LGPLv2 for now, based on the included COPYING file?

(oh - and can my package be both GPLv2 and LGPLv2, or do I need to tease
this apart into 2 packages now...)

Thanks,

-Eric