GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi,

Valgrind has been upgraded to GPLv3+. I was packaging
valgrind-3.26.0-RC1 and redid the License tags.

There is one new tag where rpminspect complains:
GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0
https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/3ccb5ff4-8019-45ff-ac91-f4642d28ed8f/

BAD Unapproved license in valgrind-1:3.26.0-0.1.RC1.fc44.src:
  GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0 Not Waivable

Suggested remedy:

The specified license abbreviation is not listed as approved in
  the\nlicense database. The license database is specified in the
  rpminspect\nconfiguration file. Check this file and send a pull
  request to the\nappropriate upstream project to update the
  database. If the license\nis listed in the database but marked
  unapproved, you may need to work\nwith the legal team regarding
  options for this software.\n

It is not clear to me which/where this license database is or which
configuration file is being referred to. So I am hoping someone on
this list can point me to that and let me know whether and how to
update it to allow GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0.

For reference the files in question have this header:

This file 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; either version 3 of the License, or
   (at your option) any later version.

In addition to the permissions in the GNU General Public License, the
   Free Software Foundation gives you unlimited permission to link the
   compiled version of this file into combinations with other programs,
   and to distribute those combinations without any restriction coming
   from the use of this file.  (The General Public License restrictions
   do apply in other respects; for example, they cover modification of
   the file, and distribution when not linked into a combined
   executable.)

Thanks,

Mark

[Ben Beasley]

If you look at 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/, you will find:

GPL-2.0-only WITH GCC-exception-2.0

GPL-2.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0

GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-3.1

LGPL-2.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0

LGPL-2.1-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0

…but you will not find

GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0

It looks like you have correctly identified the SPDX expression, based 
on the license notice header you quoted, so your next step should be to 
file an issue on fedora-license-data asking for review of the new 
license/exception combination:

https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/new?type=ISSUE&...

– Ben Beasley (FAS: music)

On 19/10/2025 3:07 pm, Mark Wielaard via legal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Valgrind has been upgraded to GPLv3+. I was packaging
> valgrind-3.26.0-RC1 and redid the License tags.
>
> There is one new tag where rpminspect complains:
> GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0
> https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/3ccb5ff4-8019-45ff-ac91-f4642d28ed8f/
>
> BAD Unapproved license in valgrind-1:3.26.0-0.1.RC1.fc44.src:
>    GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0 Not Waivable
>
> Suggested remedy:
>
> The specified license abbreviation is not listed as approved in
>    the\nlicense database. The license database is specified in the
>    rpminspect\nconfiguration file. Check this file and send a pull
>    request to the\nappropriate upstream project to update the
>    database. If the license\nis listed in the database but marked
>    unapproved, you may need to work\nwith the legal team regarding
>    options for this software.\n
>
> It is not clear to me which/where this license database is or which
> configuration file is being referred to. So I am hoping someone on
> this list can point me to that and let me know whether and how to
> update it to allow GPL-3.0-or-later WITH GCC-exception-2.0.
>
> For reference the files in question have this header:
> This file 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; either version 3 of the License, or
> (at your option) any later version.
>
> In addition to the permissions in the GNU General Public License, the
> Free Software Foundation gives you unlimited permission to link the
> compiled version of this file into combinations with other programs,
> and to distribute those combinations without any restriction coming
> from the use of this file.  (The General Public License restrictions
> do apply in other respects; for example, they cover modification of
> the file, and distribution when not linked into a combined
> executable.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi Ben,

On Sun, Oct 19, 2025 at 03:17:01PM +0100, Ben Beasley via legal wrote:
> It looks like you have correctly identified the SPDX expression,
> based on the license notice header you quoted, so your next step
> should be to file an issue on fedora-license-data asking for review
> of the new license/exception combination:
>
> https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/new?type=ISSUE&...

Thanks. I just did that:
https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/708

Cheers,

Mark