meta, meta-selftest: Replace more non-SPDX license identifiers

In commit ceda3238 (meta/meta-selftest/meta-skeleton: Update LICENSE
variable to use SPDX license identifiers) all LICENSE variables were
updated to only use SPDX license identifiers.

This does the same for comments and other variables where it is
appropriate to use the official SPDX license identifiers. There are
still references to, e.g., "GPLv3", but they are then typically in
descriptive text where they refer to the license in a generic sense.

(From OE-Core rev: 165759dced7fbe73b1db2ede67047896071dc6d0)

Signed-off-by: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>

1 files changed, 8 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/meta/recipes-multimedia/pulseaudio/pulseaudio.inc b/meta/recipes-multimedia/pulseaudio/pulseaudio.inc
index bbab3ae038..a69dd32bd7 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-multimedia/pulseaudio/pulseaudio.inc
+++ b/meta/recipes-multimedia/pulseaudio/pulseaudio.inc
@@ -5,7 +5,8 @@ HOMEPAGE = "http://www.pulseaudio.org"
 AUTHOR = "Lennart Poettering"
 SECTION = "libs/multimedia"
 
-# Most of PulseAudio code is under LGPLv2.1+. There are a few exceptions:
+# Most of PulseAudio code is under LGPL-2.1-or-later. There are a few
+# exceptions:
 #
 # The "adrian" echo canceller variant has code under a non-standard permissive
 # license. See src/modules/echo-cancel/adrian-license.txt for details. This
@@ -39,11 +40,12 @@ SECTION = "libs/multimedia"
 # The dependency with the most complicated licensing considerations is libdbus.
 # When PACKAGECONFIG[dbus] is enabled (like it is by default), libdbus will be
 # used by both the server and the client library (libpulse). Does this affect
-# applications that use libpulse? It should be also noted that libdbus is
-# dual-licensed: either GPLv2+ or AFL-2 terms apply. Whose decision is it which
-# of the licenses apply? What a mess. Some people hold the view that libdbus is
-# a system library that is covered by the "special exception" in GPLv2's
-# section 3, and therefore libdbus's GPL license doesn't affect PulseAudio.
+# applications that use libpulse? It should also be noted that libdbus is
+# dual-licensed: either GPL-2.0-or-later or AFL-2.0 terms apply. Whose decision
+# is it which of the licenses apply? What a mess. Some people hold the view that
+# libdbus is a system library that is covered by the "special exception" in
+# GPLv2's section 3, and therefore libdbus's GPL license doesn't affect
+# PulseAudio.
 LICENSE = "LGPL-2.1-or-later & MIT & BSD-3-Clause"
 
 LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE;md5=0e5cd938de1a7a53ea5adac38cc10c39 \