Hi, Thanks for confirming. There is one more confirmation I required before I submit a patch series on necessary libhugetlbfs tests, Between LTP and Kselftests, Choosing LTP is right decision? (mentioned details in patch description) Thanks On Mon, 2022-09-12 at 10:43 +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > Hi! > > As mentioned in the patch description, there is a conflict in > > license, > > That is why, I have avoided to put any of them in the header. Once > > confirmed within the community, I can add the original license > > here. > > (GPL2.1+) as > > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/wiki/Test-Writing-Guidelines > > this says only to add code with GPL2.0+. > > As far as I can tell there is no GPL2.1+ the only 2.1 version in > existence is LGPL. > > GPL2.1+ usually happens to be an error when someone takes library > header > with LGPL2.1+ license and removes the "Lesser" part. > > However it looks like the whole libhugetlbfs is under LGPL2.1+ which > kind of makes sense for a library, but not so much for the tests > since > these do not provide a library that can be linked againts at all. >
