This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC][PATCH][BZ 2100] blowfish support in libcrypt

On 01/06/2017 05:08, Björn Esser wrote:
> Am 31.05.2017 um 22:48 schrieb Adhemerval Zanella:
>> On 31/05/2017 14:33, Björn Esser wrote:
>>>  From f781e7f3e151ed89edd357734dd457bd4cd39ec0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: =?UTF-8?q?Bj=C3=B6rn=20Esser?= <>
>>> Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 13:37:36 +0200
>>> Subject: [PATCH] This is an implementation of a password hashing method,
>>>   provided via the crypt(3) and a reentrant interface.  It is fully compatible
>>>   with OpenBSD's bcrypt.c for prefix "$2b$", originally by Niels Provos and
>>>   David Mazieres.
>> I would like to hear from someone more experienced with licenses if we actually
>> use the license on some file as-is or if we should re-license it before actually
>> reviewing it.
> When running `licensecheck -r .` on the glibc source-tree, there are many files being licensed MIT/X11 and/or BSD 3-clause.  I don't see any reason Public Domain isn't suitable then.

What I am not sure is which is the correct current policy for new additions,
which might be different that previous code integrations done in the past.

> Anyways, since Public Domain doesn't restrict relicensing, I can add a `LGPL v2.1 or later` license to the files in question.

It makes thing easier if it is the case then.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]