On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Lewis Jardine wrote: > /unless that component itself accompanies the executable/." (my emphasis) > > As I understand it, in a Debian distribution, anything that could > qualify for the exception 'accompanies the executable' by virtue of > being on the same CD/web server/etc. Is this a correct > interpretation? Typically. Yet, in this particular case, we were talking (hypothetically) about moving FreeRadius into non-free, and whether or not that would enable us to distribute it at all by activating this clause. Since non-free is not part of Debian, and doesn't get distributed on the same CD, an argument could be made that it doesn't accompany OpenSSL. [I don't know if I agree with this argument, but I'll admit that a sufficiently high powered lawyer could get this argument to convince a court of law.] However, I've maintained that even if that is the case, we still can't activate this clause because OpenSSL is not "normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components". It is especially telling that openssl is Priority: optional, not even Priority: standard or higher as are pretty much all of the "major components" (kernel[1], compiler, etc.)] Don Armstrong 1: Well, most kernels are optional too, but you'll be hard pressed to have a system without one somewhere... -- When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me. -- Emo Philips. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature