Re: openssl and GPL
David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 04:15:09PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> > 2. Is <URL:http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html#LEGAL> wrong? ie.
> > "the GPL does not place restrictions on using libraries that are part of
> > the normal operating system distribution".
> Yes, it does state that. The restrictions on it, however, are somewhat
> confusing, and leads many of us to believe that Debian can't distribute
> GPL'ed code linked with it in main. For one thing, putting it on the
> same CD as libssl wouldn't be possible, as then "that component itself
> [libssl, in this case] accompanies the executable."
Would all this be solved if we declared libssl an essential part of
the operating system? The OpenSSL FAQ claims it would. On a woody
system, apt-cache showpkg libssl0.9.6 lists about 170 packages that
depend on it, some of them libraries, so it is in any case a package
that is used a lot. And since it has moved to main, even more
packages may want to use it.
Böser, böser Pinguin!
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org