I did check everything and it did look like ext2fs code with minor
modifications that I fully understand to support ext4 extents and
checksums it's not that big of a deal : ext4 is just ext2 with 64 bit,
different checksums and extents tree walking. Now I did use tooling
but that tooling is not GPL licensed at all, I will stand by this
position.

On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 3:40 AM Theo de Raadt <deraadt@openbsd.org> wrote:
>
> So the story changes... now you say you wrote it.
>
>
> Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 6:17 PM Theo de Raadt <deraadt@openbsd.org> wrote:
> > > I have looked at the diffs.
> > >
> > > There is a claim that University of California holds copyright over large
> > > chunks of code which are new.  These are perhaps mostly copied, but have
> > > been changed in novel ways.  I didn't dig deep enough to decide if the
> > > changes are trivial or complicated, I just looked at the volume.
> >
> > Well most code was taken from ext2fs
> >
> > > There is a different claim that you hold copyright over large chunks of
> > > new code.
> >
> > I did write it and read it with some tooling of my choice.
> >
> > > Amongst that, there are pieces containing structures, and CRC, which you
> > > claim you actually wrote.  You may have used AI tooling to do that.
> >
> > That's true.
> >
> > > But that leaves the situation that large chunks of new code do not have
> > > provenance under Copyright law.  You did not write them, you said an AI did.
> > > Then you, or the AI, put a Copyright notice at the top of those files.
> >
> > That's true for crc32c which is ChatGPT code and debug and most short
> > functions except VOP_*
> >
> > > That is a legal statement that this is a new work by a human creator.
> > > But a human creator didn't do this.
> >
> > Well I take upon myself that this code will be well copied if you put
> > my name on it. Isn't that the goal of the copy right ?
> >
> > > Since every file in OpenBSD has been continually verified to ensure
> > > correct Copyright, and we've even deleted code which has incorrect
> > > Copyright, the chances of us accepting such new code with such a suspicious
> > > Copyright situation is zero.
> >
> > Well in the past copyright situations have been resolved and if
> > someone wants to step up and change these copyright troubles I would
> > be delighted.
> >