Hi, The README file in the audit userspace package says: LICENSE ======= The audit daemon is released as GPL'd code. The audit daemon's libraries libaudit.* and libauparse.* are released under LGPL so that it may be linked with 3rd party software. However don't these libraries contain code from this file https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-userspace/blob/master/lib/strsplit.c which states its license is GPLv2+?

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 01:54:52PM -0400, Steve Grubb wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2017 11:32:14 PM EDT Richard Fontana wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The README file in the audit userspace package says: > > LICENSE > > ======= > > The audit daemon is released as GPL'd code. The > > audit daemon's libraries libaudit.* and libauparse.* are released > > under LGPL so that it may be linked with 3rd party software. > > > > However don't these libraries contain code from this file > > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-userspace/blob/master/lib/strsplit. > > c > > which states its license is GPLv2+? > > Yes, that looks like a copy and paste mistake. Thanks for pointing that > out. Anything in: > > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-userspace/blob/master/lib/ > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-userspace/blob/master/auparse/ > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-userspace/blob/master/bindings/ > > is intended to LGPL. Would replacing the comment at the beginning of the > file be sufficient to fix this issue? It may depend on the history of the file. If you were the only person who contributed to it, yes. But if anyone else contributed to it, and let's say the contributions were not copyrighted by Red Hat, and the contributions were sufficiently nontrivial, then maybe we'd have to get permission from such other contributors to change the indicated license of the file.