[systemd-devel] Systemd license vs. libcryptsetup license

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek at in.waw.pl
Wed Jun 7 16:30:39 UTC 2017

On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 05:26:21PM +0200, Krzysztof Jackiewicz wrote:
> Thanks, for explanation.
> > - a collection of rpms, like a linux distro, including systemd.rpm,
> >   libcryptsetup.rpm, and thousands of other loosely coupled rpms
> >   → that's a mere aggregation, each of the thousands of components carries
> >   it's own license, each has to be satisfied separately
> It is mere aggregation as long as binary from systemd.rpm does not link to a library from libcryptsetup.rpm. If it does then it's a combination or a derivative work in terms of GPL and as such the systemd.rpm should include a GPL license (and of course comply with other GPL terms and conditions). Is that correct?

No, that makes no sense. It'd mean that putting two zip files that one
provides and the other uses a function with the same name next to one
another would make them somehow connected and derivatives of one
another. The whole point of dynamic linking is that you can provide
independent implementations of the API, and you can clearly substitute
libcryptsetup with another implementation, and both bodies of code are
usable without one another.


More information about the systemd-devel mailing list