[1] is incorrect, what TiVo did (disabling the proprietary software on your device when you modify the GPL software) is allowed even by GPLv3, even though RMS did want to prevent the possibility of that. Also, the requirement to allow software reinstall is there even in GPLv2.
https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017... https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t...
>> a key reason that the GPLv2 was created, is the software freedom to reinstall a modified version.
Would that mean e.g. Apple is breaking the GPL by including GPLv2 components in iOS and not letting me reinstall modified versions of those components on my iPhone?
If Apple were including GPLv2 components in iOS, yes. Why do you think all the Apple userland is based on BSD?
Edit: Ohhh, I think they might all be lgpl. Or, one is for libstdc++ but it mentions some special exemption?
[1] e.g. when TiVo violated the GPL he let them, because apparently they found a loophole. When FSF closed the loophole definitively in GPLv3 he refused to adopt it. Also he grumbles about Nvidia but he was the one who created the weird loophole that “some parts of the kernel aren’t gpl” specifically to allow them to violate GPL so Linux could have their drivers.