On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:26:41AM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote: > Bart and Dmitry: I submit that we are good to copy the headers into the > repositories, but we should take a few steps just to make clear that we > are in full compliance with the GPL v2. > > Firstly, we are distributing the headers under Section 1 (distribution) > of the GPL, so we should keep the headers in a separate directory that > contains its own COPYING file as well as the GPL v2 and Linux syscall note > - unless they are already available elsewhere in the repo. > > The headers must be copied verbatim so as to not trigger Section 2 > (modification). And it is probably good to include in the commit > comment what kernel version or commit they were drawn from so that can > be easily confirmed. > > Section 3 still doesn't apply, as any resulting object code or > executables are no more a derived work due to the availability of the > header than they were previously. And I don't think anyone is claiming > that the repo itself is a derived work - in this context it is just a > distribution medium. > > The COPYING file, or equivalent, for the project should explicitly > exclude any claim on the kernel header directory to make clear we are > not trying to sublicense the headers as LGPL - which could breach > Section 4. > > Other than those points, I don't see anywhere we may be in breach. That looks good, you should also consider following the REUSE specification: https://reuse.software/ which recommends using a LICENSES/ directory for the different licenses in your project and use SPDX lines at the top of your files to make everything explicit. The `reuse lint` command line tool should give you lots of hints on good things to fix up in this area. Good luck! greg k-h