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


On Wednesday 21 June 2006 10:49, Pekka Pessi wrote:
> "ext George Danchev" <danchev@spnet.net> writes:
> >> Perhaps the usage is small enough that the code is not really a
> >> derivative work of RFC3174.  If you're lucky.  If not, there's probably
> >> an alternate SHA1 implementation somewhere which doesn't use the RFC
> >> sample code, which could be substituted; the actual cipher almost
> >> certainly qualifies as an uncopyrightable "fact".
> >> ----
> >
> >Aha, these are the files:
> >libsofia-sip-ua/ipt/sofia-sip/sha1.h
> >libsofia-sip-ua/ipt/sha1.c
> Hmhh. We do not use them much within library, we could distribute
> them separately for applications.  I'll have to have peek around
> for the code...

removed or better yet, reimplemented ;-)

> >> All the other licenses are fine.
> >
> >Good.
> >
> >> Joe Smith noted two without an explicit right to sell, but the IBM one
> >> grants the right to "use in any way he or she deems fit", which I think
> >> is pretty definite permission.
> >>
> >> The other says "unrestricted use", which *probably* implies the right
> >> to sell; I would contact Pekka Pessi and ask if that includes the right
> >> to sell. If he says "yes", then I'd say it's fine.
> "Yes."


> >This applies to libsofia-sip-ua/ipt/rc4.c, and
> >libsofia-sip-ua/su/getopt.c was incorrectly mentioned in the
> >COPYRIGHTS, since it does not exist.
> It looks to me that getopt.c is still there?

It is in thecurrent darcs repository as found at:
but not distributed with the tarball as found at:
with md5sum of 'e0919823ca1bf32bb062ce161cc5accb'

or probably that is not the intended behaviour ?

pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB 

Attachment: pgpShKqPmOXVd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: