[gnu.org #693634] GMP as dual-license GPLv2+/LGPLv3+?

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n.mavrogiannopoulos at gmail.com
Wed May 18 17:21:48 CEST 2011

On 05/18/2011 05:02 PM, Niels Möller wrote:
> Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org> writes:
>> however to give examples of
>> GPLv2-only projects see an old discussion about moving GnuTLS to
>> LGPLv3+:
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnutls/2008-09/msg00004.html
> I don't have the time to review the whole discussion now, but the
> message you link to gives cups and snort as two examples of "major"
> applications using gnutls and licensed as GPLv2 (and in the case of
> CUPS, I think it's GPLv2 + an exception to allow linking with openssl).

Both projects have specified explicit GPL version numbers thus they
are not GPLv2+. Check

and snort's license.txt which says:

1. "Failure to Specify." Section 9 of the GPL V2 allows a licensee of a
program governed by an unspecified version of the General Public License
to choose any version of the General Public License ever published by
the Free Software Foundation to govern his or her use of such program.

This provision is not applicable to your use of SNORT because we have
expressly stated in a number of instances that any third party's use,
modification or distribution of SNORT is governed by GPL V2.

I find the dual license of LGPLv3 and GPLv2 is a nice compromise as it
allows free software under GPLv2 only to use LGPL libraries. There is no
reason to alienate these projects as they are Free software. Simon
already mentioned that we consider this licensing scheme for gnutls as well.


More information about the gmp-devel mailing list