Re: Is this patch OK for main?
[I'm probably repeating myself, but this is for the benefit of debian-legal
readers and may help to shorten discussion]
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 16:10:39 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> could someone please tell me if this patch:
> - contains any code with legal problems (e.g. patents)?
Not that I'm aware of.
> - forces the package to go to non-US?
It doesn't. It essentially has two parts
- hooks to crypto/code to deal with passphrases entered on terminals.
These do not force a package to go to non-US. There's precedent in e.g.
mutt, whose "mutt-i" package (containing hooks to PGP/GPG) was merged into
the main mutt package after a similar discussion quite some time ago.
- an implementation of a one-way hash (RIPE-MD 160). It's a one-way hash,
not a cipher; as such there is no US export issue that I'm aware of.
As for precedents, there's also Debian GNU/Linux 2.2r2 which includes an
earlier version of this patch (i.e, without this patch, our next release
will be incompatible with the current one as reported in e.g. #36939), and
there's the issue that if there were a problem, there'd be a problem with
having the diff posted to a mailing list hosted in the US and archived on
webservers hosted in the US.
Ray
--
LEADERSHIP A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with auto-
destructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch
it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own.
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Reply to: