Two reasons:
1) This license is included due to the Perl module 'Expect'. However I wasn't able to actually
locate it's sources in the MySQL source tarball. I believe it's a remnant of a code that was
removed in the past.
I've asked the MySQL upstream to verify my claim and either disprove it or fix the LICENSE
file in wihch they mention it.
For this reason I believe the 'GPL-1.0-or-later' also does not apply, so I'm removing it too.
I'll put the 'GPL-1.0-or-later' should upstream disprove my findings.
2) As per clarification on the Fedora License mailing list:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LBAZXYBAA4YHJ2GEWEP5S7QXVOB76MUR/
"
If your package is licensed under a known choice of two licenses and
one is a "good" license and one is a "bad" license, then the License:
field must reflect the "good" license only. This is highly uncommon in
Fedora packages apart from the case of Perl modules dual licensed
under the GPL and the Artistic License 1.0. In that case you must pick
the appropriate identifier for the GPL side (which in Perl modules
will typically map to SPDX "GPL-1.0-or-later"). You are encouraged to
include a comment memorializing this, for example:
\# Upstream project is dual licensed GPL | Artistic 1.0
"
After discussion with change owner, I've prepared the correct solution.
There is a difference between Fedora and CentOS Stream 10 / RHEL 10:
- in CentOS Stream 10 / RHEL 10, the change is self-contained by the
'openssl-devel' package itself, which now defines OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE
in the headers so new application builds don't use engine at all
- in Fedora, the headers containing the OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE definition
are put into a separate sub-package 'openssl-devel-engine', instead
of being put into the 'openssl-devel'
