Correct license comments in the source files
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) version 3.
There is no GNU Lesser General Public License version 2 – it was called GNU Library General Public License. It was only renamed to “lesser” in version 2.1.
So which of these interpretations is correct?
LGPL-2.1-only OR LGPL-3.0-only– considering 2.1 still version 2, ignoring non-existent “lesser” version
LGPL-2.0-only OR LGPL-2.1-only OR LGPL-3.0-only– considering 2.1 still version 2, considering “library” the same license as “lesser”
LGPL-2.0-only OR LGPL-3.0-only– considering “library” the same license as “lesser”
unfree– the declaration refers to unknown license so it is invalid as a whole and it falls back to “all rights reserved”