pciutils: change license to GPL-2+

[reneeotten (Renee Otten)]

Currently the qt6-qtwebengine port is non-distributable because of:

❯ ./port_binary_distributable.tcl -v  qt6-qtwebengine
"qt6-qtwebengine" is not distributable because its license "OpenSSLException" conflicts with license "GPL-2" of dependency "pciutils"

However, upstream states in the README on their website:

Copyright (c) 1997--2022 Martin Mares <mj@ucw.cz>

All files in this package can be freely distributed and used according
to the terms of the GNU General Public License, either version 2 or
(at your opinion) any newer version. See https://www.gnu.org/ for details.

but that information isn't clear from the COPYING file.

If we would change the license to GPL-2+ that would make the qt6-qtwebengine distributable, which would be very useful.

@Marcus: do you feel comfortable making this change or would you like me to reach out to upstream for confirmation?

[jmroot (Joshua Root)]

The uncertainty probably arises from the fact that the actual source files in the distribution say "Can be freely distributed and used under the terms of the GNU GPL," with no version(s) specified (the COPYING file contains GPLv2).

[jmroot (Joshua Root)]

BTW, the current version of port_binary_distributable.tcl has better handling of OpenSSLException:

% ./jobs/port_binary_distributable.tcl -v qt6-qtwebengine
"qt6-qtwebengine" is not distributable because its license "GPL-3" conflicts with license "GPL-2" of dependency "pciutils"

[MarcusCalhoun-Lopez (Marcus Calhoun-Lopez)]

Replying to jmroot:

The uncertainty probably arises from the fact that the actual source files in the distribution say "Can be freely distributed and used under the terms of the GNU GPL," with no version(s) specified (the COPYING file contains GPLv2).

Just to add to the ambiguity, ​getopt.c and ​getopt.h do include

   Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any
   later version.

I did not check them all, but a sampling of the different package managers for ​pciutils seems to indicate most of them view the license as GPL 2.

As I am not an expert in these matters, I think the safest course of action would be to contact the upstream developers.

[reneeotten (Renee Otten)]

I've ​asked upstream for clarification.

[reneeotten (Renee Otten)]

the response is: "GPL-2+" is correct and they have ​added the SPDX identifiers to all source files.

I opened ​PR#19152 to update to the latest version (not containing the above listed commit) and at the same time updated the license field.

[reneeotten (Renee Otten)]

In 194717dfe9e3cdd081d55a1d0599be44d093bba9/macports-ports (master):

pciutils: update to 3.10.0, set license to GPL-2+

Closes: #67602