FOSSC-152 tcpdump

[dierberg]

No description provided.

[OliverFendt]

Awesome @dierberg, I only have some comments

[OliverFendt]

The license conclusion is correct, the license requires an acknowledgment:
This product includes software developed by the Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan and its contributors." please add this in the acknowledgement section, which will then be the FileAttribution.
The acknowledgments requirements regarding the Berkeley University are irrelevant

[OliverFendt]

see my comment in addrtostr.c

[OliverFendt]

The conclusion is correct, the license requires an acknowledgment:
This product includes software developed by the NetBSD Foundation, Inc. and its contributors.
Please add this in the acknowledgment section

[OliverFendt]

The conclusion is correct, the BSD-4-Clause instance requires an acknowledgment, please add it:
This product includes software developed by Yen Yen Lim and North Dakota State University

[OliverFendt]

the LicenseRef-Permission-Notice-3a2bf8a18b88925f22a9130d4cf995f0 AND LicenseRef-warranty-disclaimer-88394e5be8e0e24e8312d81013827b8f is a dual license statement:
Permission to use, copy, and modify this software with or without fee
is hereby granted, provided that this entire notice is included in
all copies of any software which is or includes a copy or
modification of this software.
You may use this code under the GNU public license if you so wish. Please
contribute changes back to the authors under this freer than GPL license
so that we may further the use of strong encryption without limitations to
all.

THIS SOFTWARE IS BEING PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED WARRANTY. IN PARTICULAR, NONE OF THE AUTHORS MAKES ANY
REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND CONCERNING THE
MERCHANTABILITY OF THIS SOFTWARE OR ITS FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.
The overall license is
LicenseRef-BSD-4-Clause-Shortened-e96ddab5f8fffe47de17b5812d71176a AND (GPL-1.0-or-later OR Permission-Notice)

[OliverFendt]

the conclusion in this case is GPL-1.0-or-later not "-only" because the GPL says if no version number of GPL is specified the user is free to choose one among the official released GPL versions, due to this we always conclude GPL-1.0-or-later in all such cases

[OliverFendt]

Please check my comments in the tag value file

[OliverFendt]

Please check my comments in the tag value file

[OliverFendt]

Please check my comments in the tag value file

[OliverFendt]

Please check my comments in the tag value file

[OliverFendt]

Awesome, there are only some minor remaining comments

[OliverFendt]

The conclusion is not fully correct. The information in the file is:
This is based on code in the CMake 3.12.4 FindPkgConfig.cmake,
which is "Distributed under the OSI-approved BSD 3-Clause License."

when you look at:
https://github.com/Kitware/CMake/blob/master/Modules/FindPkgConfig.cmake
you see the following:
Distributed under the OSI-approved BSD 3-Clause License. See accompanying
file Copyright.txt or https://cmake.org/licensing for details.

if you then surf to the given link you will be displayed with:
CMake is distributed under the OSI-approved BSD 3-clause License. Please see its Copyright.txt for details. The CMake source tree also contains some third-party components with compatible licenses.

Copyright.txt is a link, when you click on it you will see:
https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/raw/master/Copyright.txt

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:

• Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
  notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

• Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
  notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
  documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

• Neither the name of Kitware, Inc. nor the names of Contributors
  may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this
  software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
"AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
(INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

Please conclude this license text for the file and add in the license comment the search, including the date 16th of Sept 2024

[OliverFendt]

Can you please change this to:
License: GPL-1.0-or-later OR Permission-Notice
The BSD-4-Clause is not to be considered for the dual licensing, nevertheless the overall license of the file is
BSD-4-Clause-Shortened-e96ddab5f8fffe47de17b5812d71176a AND (GPL-1.0-or-later OR Permission-Notice)

[OliverFendt]

Please change this to:
To the extent that files may be licensed under either GPL-1.0-or-later OR Permission-Notice, in this context,
Permission-Notice has been chosen. This choice shall not restrict the freedom of other users to select either
GPL-1.0-or-later OR Permission-Notice licenses. For convenience, all license texts are provided.

[OliverFendt]

Please have a look at my comments in the Disclosure file

[OliverFendt]

Please have a look at my comments in the Disclosure file

[OliverFendt]

Please have a look at my comments in the Disclosure file

[OliverFendt]

Please have a look at my comments in the Disclosure file

[OliverFendt]

Great work, thank you very much @dierberg