[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: cadaver licensing issues: openssl and GPL again

On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 10:06:35AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> And those are really all the requirements that the LGPL imposes on
> source code that is linked to the library to form an executable, but is
> not part of the library itself -- i.e., not much.  It certainly doesn't
> require that they be available under the same terms, since it explicitly
> allows closed-source apps to link against LGPL libs; so the OpenSSL
> license is not really a problem at all.

I did not get your last message. You are talking about LGPL, OpenSSL is not
LGPL and it looks like it _is_ a problem for GPL Programs, cause this is all
this thread is about. It is a modified BSD with advertising. Do you mean the
LGPL Code (in that case one source file from the glibc!)?

There are 2 options here:

a) consider OpenSSL part of the OS, but this wont work since the lib and the
GPL work may not be shipped together in that case (ugh!)

b) relicense cadaver to allow openssl, but this wont work cause of LGPL code
included from other sources.

My idea would be to relicense cadaver (with the exception of the FSF files)
and let me handle this. I think there should be no problem to call the md5
function from libcrypto instead of ne_md5.c in case of enabled openssl.

  (OO)      -- Bernd_Eckenfels@Wendelinusstrasse39.76646Bruchsal.de --
 ( .. )  ecki@{inka.de,linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/
  o--o     *plush*  2048/93600EFD  eckes@irc  +497257930613  BE5-RIPE
(O____O)  When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!

Reply to: