License query for libudev in udev-142

License query for libudev in udev-142

[Soh Kam Yung]

This is a follow-up to this mail sent by Kay Sievers
[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/14653] which has
this statement:

"libudev is LGPL, only the daemon and the tools are GPL."

I've checked through the headers for the source code in the udev/lib
directory for udev-142 source tar file.  They are all marked as
licensed under the LGPL.

However, one file, libudev-device-db-write.c, has a #include "udev.h".
 The file udev/udev.h is licensed under the GPL.

Does this affect Kay's statement that libudev is LGPL?

Regards,
Kam-Yung
-- 
Soh Kam Yung
my Google Reader Shared links:
(http://www.google.com/reader/shared/16851815156817689753)
my Google Reader Shared SFAS links:
(http://www.google.com/reader/shared/user/16851815156817689753/label/sfas)

Re: License query for libudev in udev-142

[Marco d'Itri]

On Oct 28, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:

> However, one file, libudev-device-db-write.c, has a #include "udev.h".
>  The file udev/udev.h is licensed under the GPL.
> 
> Does this affect Kay's statement that libudev is LGPL?
No, interface definitions tend to not be subject to copyright anyway.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Re: License query for libudev in udev-142

[Alan Jenkins]

On 10/28/09, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a follow-up to this mail sent by Kay Sievers
> [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/14653] which has
> this statement:
>
> "libudev is LGPL, only the daemon and the tools are GPL."
>
> I've checked through the headers for the source code in the udev/lib
> directory for udev-142 source tar file.  They are all marked as
> licensed under the LGPL.
>
> However, one file, libudev-device-db-write.c, has a #include "udev.h".
>  The file udev/udev.h is licensed under the GPL.
>
> Does this affect Kay's statement that libudev is LGPL?
>
> Regards,
> Kam-Yung

That file should not be linked into libudev; it's only needed to
implement the udev dameon itself.  Only udevd is allowed to write to
the database.

It might even be an accident; it seems odd that it would really need udev.h.

Regards
Alan

Re: License query for libudev in udev-142

[Soh Kam Yung]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Alan Jenkins
<sourcejedi.lkml@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 10/28/09, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to this mail sent by Kay Sievers
>> [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/14653] which has
>> this statement:
>>
>> "libudev is LGPL, only the daemon and the tools are GPL."
>>
>> I've checked through the headers for the source code in the udev/lib
>> directory for udev-142 source tar file.  They are all marked as
>> licensed under the LGPL.
>>
>> However, one file, libudev-device-db-write.c, has a #include "udev.h".
>>  The file udev/udev.h is licensed under the GPL.
>>
>> Does this affect Kay's statement that libudev is LGPL?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kam-Yung
>
> That file should not be linked into libudev; it's only needed to
> implement the udev dameon itself.  Only udevd is allowed to write to
> the database.
>
> It might even be an accident; it seems odd that it would really need udev.h.
>
> Regards
> Alan
>

In udev-142, libudev-device-db-write.c uses
udev_selinux_setfscreatecon() and udev_selinux_resetfscreatecon() in
udev_device_update_db(), which is declared in udev.h.

Regards,
Kam-Yung
-- 
Soh Kam Yung
my Google Reader Shared links:
(http://www.google.com/reader/shared/16851815156817689753)
my Google Reader Shared SFAS links:
(http://www.google.com/reader/shared/user/16851815156817689753/label/sfas)

Re: License query for libudev in udev-142

[Soh Kam Yung]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Alan Jenkins
> <sourcejedi.lkml@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 10/28/09, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is a follow-up to this mail sent by Kay Sievers
>>> [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/14653] which has
>>> this statement:
>>>
>>> "libudev is LGPL, only the daemon and the tools are GPL."
>>>
>>> I've checked through the headers for the source code in the udev/lib
>>> directory for udev-142 source tar file.  They are all marked as
>>> licensed under the LGPL.
>>>
>>> However, one file, libudev-device-db-write.c, has a #include "udev.h".
>>>  The file udev/udev.h is licensed under the GPL.
>>>
>>> Does this affect Kay's statement that libudev is LGPL?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kam-Yung
>>
>> That file should not be linked into libudev; it's only needed to
>> implement the udev dameon itself.  Only udevd is allowed to write to
>> the database.
>>
>> It might even be an accident; it seems odd that it would really need udev.h.
>>
>> Regards
>> Alan
>>
>
> In udev-142, libudev-device-db-write.c uses
> udev_selinux_setfscreatecon() and udev_selinux_resetfscreatecon() in
> udev_device_update_db(), which is declared in udev.h.
>
> Regards,
> Kam-Yung

Hello,

Is there any updates on this query?

Does the presence of the #include "udev.h" in the libudev code change
the LGPL status of libudev in udev-142 or will this be taken care of
in a future udev release?

Regards,
Kam-Yung
-- 
Soh Kam Yung
my Google Reader Shared links:
(http://www.google.com/reader/shared/16851815156817689753)
my Google Reader Shared SFAS links:
(http://www.google.com/reader/shared/user/16851815156817689753/label/sfas)

Re: License query for libudev in udev-142

[Marco d'Itri]

On Nov 02, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there any updates on this query?
Other than "an header like that one is not copyrightable"?

> Does the presence of the #include "udev.h" in the libudev code change
> the LGPL status of libudev in udev-142 or will this be taken care of
> in a future udev release?
No, you can still consider it LGPL'ed.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Re: License query for libudev in udev-142

[Alan Jenkins]

On 11/2/09, Soh Kam Yung <sohkamyung@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there any updates on this query?
>
> Does the presence of the #include "udev.h" in the libudev code change
> the LGPL status of libudev in udev-142 or will this be taken care of
> in a future udev release?

Sorry, I thought I had answered the question.  I believe that although
libudev-device-db-write.c is in the "lib" directory, it is not
actually linked into libudev.  You can surely confirm this yourself by
looking at the commands used to build libudev... or by building
libudev on it's own after removing the libudev-device-db-write.c file.

Note that in the current git tree, udev/lib is moved to /libudev, and
there is at least one more "private" file under /libudev which is not
linked into the LGPL library, but which is only used in the GPL'd
daemon.  It looks like they have all been named "libudev-*-private.c".
 Hopefully that should provide a little more clarity of intent.

Regards
Alan