Re: Accepted lynx-cur 2.8.5-10 (i386 source all)
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 09:10:55AM +0900, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> From: Thomas Dickey <email@example.com>
> Subject: Re: Accepted lynx-cur 2.8.5-10 (i386 source all)
> Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:46:58 -0400 (EDT)
> > One of the 'links' developers brought up this issue a few months ago -
> > isn't 'links' GPL also? (w3m is not, I recall).
> Yes, links is GPL so we don't distribute links+openssl,
> as far as I checked.
> links (0.98-1) unstable; urgency=low
> * Changed back to original ("Mikulas") codebase
> * SSL is still stipped due to the license problems between
> GPL and OpenSSL: it is not possible to distribute links+openssl
> neither binary nor source.
> But elinks(extended links?), which is also GPL, seemed
> linked with gnutls already and supported ssl.
I did recall that he said it was able to use gnutls. The gist of the
remarks was that it was only temporary, since there was some discussion
that someone's opinion was that it wasn't needed. I did take a look
at gnutls, just in case but a quick read of the code demonstrated that
it wasn't very portable, so I put it aside until the issue would come
Thomas E. Dickey <firstname.lastname@example.org>