[klibc] [patch 11/12] Unpleasantness in linux/nfs_mount.h
Erik van Konijnenburg
ekonijn at xs4all.nl
Wed May 25 14:36:00 PDT 2005
On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 01:08:19PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Erik van Konijnenburg wrote:
> > This raises the reverse question: am I allowed to distribute ipconfig and
> > nfsmount with my GPL package, and if so, do they need extra licence notices?
> a) yes, b) not sure if it's legally required; I would prefer it.
Me too, it makes it a lot easier later on for others to decide what
they can do with the software.
To make sure I add the right licence, is it correct that: there are no
explicit licence statements in the current sources, so it falls under the
default licence given in klibc/LICENCE. Copying the copyright statement
from run_init.c to the main.c files from both ipconfig and nfsmount,
plus a LICENCE.KLIBC in the package top directory is the best way to
inform recipients of the copyright and licence?
More information about the klibc