[pulseaudio-discuss] Licensing issue

Lennart Poettering lennart at poettering.net
Fri Mar 28 08:53:14 PDT 2008

On Fri, 28.03.08 12:50, DSK (dsk.in.2007 at gmail.com) wrote:

> Hi all,
>     I see that the daemon side has a GPL License and the client side
> library has LGPL, but libatomic_ops is GPL.  So wont the
> libatomic_ops licensing affect the client side library licensing as
> i understand that its linked to client side library as well ..
> Or is that my understanding of libatomic_ops getting linked to
> client side library (i.e. libpulse) wrong?


Quoting libatomic_ops' LICENSING file: 

Our intent is to make it easy to use libatomic_ops, in both free and
proprietary software.  Hence most code that we expect to be linked
into a client application is covered by an MIT-style license.

A few library routines are covered by the GNU General Public License.
These are put into a separate library, libatomic_ops_gpl.a .

We don't use the part in libatomic_ops_gpl.a.

Also, on most relevant archs we now use gcc or assembler atomic
primitives. libatomic_ops used is only as a fallback on archs that are
not supported by gcc's atomic primitives or where we don't ship native
assembler code.

Hence: Everything's fine. No licensing issues anywhere in sight.


Lennart Poettering                        Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net         ICQ# 11060553
http://0pointer.net/lennart/           GnuPG 0x1A015CC4

More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list