From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BCE2C433E0 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:52:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D92F320809 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:52:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1596131574; bh=n/2hSNa3DcXsbO8mzTQ5vvMptmmdIo0Yk1BhCdmlwnU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=sDsx+oTCnLC9REbFFubZaAh6Oa2Z5zjN67eZINBfctyMw0HCFJKkuOhu3Tj0OgN1M d1jzKSl0cz2TVQ0IOEmqVdQjGLq8L2IJixZrYqC4cfaYvaFFeD/HV+mulBu3WdJLhm 62ORyvOHKYpiiiu/6xyrWucfb9qHdr4c4oh6VnF8= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730204AbgG3Rwy (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:52:54 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:46996 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728562AbgG3Rwy (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:52:54 -0400 Received: from sol.localdomain (c-107-3-166-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [107.3.166.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E21E42083B; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:52:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1596131574; bh=n/2hSNa3DcXsbO8mzTQ5vvMptmmdIo0Yk1BhCdmlwnU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Y7hg6N11L+xRx7A6X5Gx+efQoG2Loe0YcDjkjiV1g8an575VNSC6grdOAxSU3lsDX 5xepD/3QnTCWDhY9TwUvt+yJ/q/hQ61DwdU9O1+tvvOtMDQ2f5N9uNgF6KtUnCHfNE /Rkfcid+nmS+vNFksoSRDaJiHvssKVwxRjuHZ4v0= Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:52:52 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Jes Sorensen Cc: Jes Sorensen , linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Split fsverity-utils into a shared library Message-ID: <20200730175252.GA1074@sol.localdomain> References: <20200211000037.189180-1-Jes.Sorensen@gmail.com> <20200211192209.GA870@sol.localdomain> <20200211231454.GB870@sol.localdomain> <20200214203510.GA1985@gmail.com> <479b0fff-6af2-32e6-a645-03fcfc65ad59@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <479b0fff-6af2-32e6-a645-03fcfc65ad59@gmail.com> Sender: linux-fscrypt-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 06:49:07PM -0500, Jes Sorensen wrote: > > We'd also need to follow shared library best practices like compiling with > > -fvisibility=hidden and marking the API functions explicitly with > > __attribute__((visibility("default"))), and setting the 'soname' like > > -Wl,-soname=libfsverity.so.0. > > > > Also, is the GPLv2+ license okay for the use case? > > Personally I only care about linking it into rpm, which is GPL v2, so > from my perspective, that is sufficient. I am also fine making it LGPL, > but given it's your code I am stealing, I cannot make that call. > Hi Jes, I'd like to revisit this, as I'm concerned about future use cases where software under other licenses (e.g. LGPL, MIT, or Apache 2.0) might want to use libfsverity -- especially if libfsverity grows more functionality. Also, fsverity-utils links to OpenSSL, which some people (e.g. Debian) consider to be incompatible with GPLv2. We think the MIT license (https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT) would offer the most flexibility. Are you okay with changing the license of fsverity-utils to MIT? If so, I'll send a patch and you can give an Acked-by on it. Thanks! - Eric