On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 03:34:02PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > I'm not sure this is true for the Postgres libraries, because the > postgres libraries can function fine without ssl support and no ssl > code is linked into your application. > Basically the library linking argument is a functionality argument and > I think part of the construction may fail in this case. I would argue that the only situation where this line of reasoning holds true is where re-linking the underlying library so that it doesn't depend on openssl is not objectionable. If it /is/ objectionable, then clearly there is some value derived from being able to distribute the application together with the "tainted" version of the library, even if only in the form of administrative convenience; and I believe it is therefore the goal of the GPL to prevent distribution of such combinations in all cases. IOW, if it's really such a minor issue, it should be no trouble to distribute the postgres libs without ssl support and make sure freeradius doesn't link against an ssl-enabled version at runtime. If someone balks at doing this, then clearly it wasn't so minor to begin with, and can't be ignored wrt the GPL. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpZMzjRlLjIf.pgp
Description: PGP signature