On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 03:24:27PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 02:03:26PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 14:31 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 02:37:35PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > > > On Sep 29, Domenico Andreoli <cavok@debian.org> wrote: > > > > > to build something with libcurl, one has to install either > > > > > libcurl3-openssl-dev or libcurl3-gnutls-dev. the built package will > > > > > depend on libcurl3 (with openssl) or libcurl3-gnutls respectively. > > > > Why is openssl the default? > > > > I think everybody agrees that in the long period everybody will want to > > > > use gnutls, which is supposed to have the same features but does not > > > > have licensing issues. > > [snip] > > > GnuTLS, OTOH, is licensed under the GPL (as opposed to the LGPL) > > [snip] > > Are you sure? http://www.gnu.org/software/gnutls/ says the core library > > is LGPL. Maybe just the tools are GPL? > Oh? I thought it was. Sorry; I'll check my facts next time. The gnutls-extras library (which is the one that provides minimal API-compatibility with OpenSSL) is GPL; the core library is LGPL. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature