AEsh at tricord.com
Wed Feb 27 07:20:08 GMT 2002
How does that apply to VFS modules that are dynamically linked, and referred
to in smb.conf via the "vfs object" tag? By including dynamically linked
libraries, this implies that Samba's license controls that of libc,
libcrypt, libnsl, and many others. I don't believe it does.
Perhaps you are referring to the other type of VFS "module": One that is
linked directly into Samba as a .o file, in the same way smbd/vfs.o is. I
agree that such modules are controlled by Samba's license.
From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abartlet at pcug.org.au]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 5:17 AM
To: Sergey Akhapkin
Cc: samba-technical at samba.org
Subject: Re: vfs-module lincense
Sergey Akhapkin wrote:
> Hello All,
> I'd wrote vfs-module for our antivirus daemon. I've question about
> Are sources of vfs-module must be open or not ?
> Are sources must be distributed under GPL (if must be open) ?
> Can we distribute it not under GPL ?
All VFS modules *MUST* be distributed under the GPL. All code that is
linked to Samba *must* be under distributable under the same licence as
That being said, you are free to also distribute it under a more liberal
licence (the LGPL for example) or another licence *and* the GPL (at the
Andrew Bartlett abartlet at pcug.org.au
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team abartlet at samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College abartlet at hawkerc.net
http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
More information about the samba-technical