Closed skruppy closed 5 months ago
Which one do you recommend?
Looking at the dependencies, for now, all of them are licensed under the MIT license. Most of them are dual licensed using Apache-2 license.
Looking at the linked dependencies of the compiled library on my system
ldd /usr/lib/security/pam_any.so
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffde5285000)
libpam.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpam.so.0 (0x0000742368e78000)
libpam_misc.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpam_misc.so.0 (0x0000742368e73000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x0000742368e4e000)
libc.so.6 => /usr/lib/libc.so.6 (0x0000742368c6c000)
/usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x0000742368f38000)
libaudit.so.1 => /usr/lib/libaudit.so.1 (0x0000742368c3f000)
libcap-ng.so.0 => /usr/lib/libcap-ng.so.0 (0x0000742368c37000)
it seems like non of those limit your choosing of licenses. Most of the libraries are using LGPL.
Other PAM modules, from the Linux PAM project itself, are using the BSD-3-Clause license and some version of GPL (required by Debian).
Combining all those information, you are quite free too choose a licence to your liking. I personally would go with the Apache-2 license, since it has the neat feature in section 5 which clarifies the license of contributions and should prevent some claims from contributors.
In order to package and distribute this library, please add a license.