Git Branch to clean up zlib licensing issues.

Ira Cooper ira at
Wed Jul 16 06:50:39 MDT 2014

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke at>

> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 08:39:39AM -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> > For us in this case: It is noise.
> >
> > In general, shipping derived files, is an easy way to end up in GPL
> > violation.  If you have derived files you can't regenerate from their
> > sources, that is a violation, though
> >
> > As the original authors, and distributors, they are NOT in violation.  We
> > could be.
> Ok. So we did not sufficiently make clear that lib/zlib is
> not covered by the GPL as the rest of Samba is?

Could well be?  It is more that people see a package as under one license.

I'm personally not worried by it.  But I don't want anyone to take what I
say as legal advice, or Red Hat's legal advice to be clear.

I'm merely saying I'd like these 4 no op files removed from our tree.


More information about the samba-technical mailing list