On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 08:22:59AM +0200, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: > > >> PKG_CHECK_MODULES([openssl], [openssl], [], > > >> [AC_MSG_ERROR([openssl is required for profanity])]) > > >> > > >> The resulting binary cannot be distributed. > > > > > Could You elaborate on that ? Why would openssl ban the binary to be > > > distributable ? > > > > The GPL and the OpenSSL license are incompatible. > > > > Thank You Russ, > > Would it be ok if upstream adds the clause as explained in [1] ? The > upstream is very responsive and open to all suggestions, so it should > not be a problem. Yes, assuming all copyright holders agree to change the license. -- WBR, wRAR
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature