Re: Bacula: GPL and OpenSSL
On Thursday 07 June 2007 23:51, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 12:17:28PM -0700, Walter Landry wrote:
> > GnuTLS + libgcrypt + libtasn1 implements everything unless you need
> > ECC.
> >
> > > And why does FSFE disagree with our interpretation?
> >
> > Michael Poole gave a good answer.
>
> He didn't address the FSFE -- where are they taking a different analysis
> than us on this?
>
> Kern, is it possible to remove the OpenSSL exception from the license of
only
> those third-party sources, and keep it in the master license?
The problem is that those third-party sources are linked into the Bacula
binaries, and since they are licensed as GPL with no modifications, I cannot
include them in a binary that has code that is licensed in a way that is
incompatible with the GPL. Adding the OpenSSL exception to my license makes
my code incompatible with the non-modified GPL, and hence I was violating the
license on those 3rd party files (copyrighted by FSF, ATT, Sun, and a few
others ...).
Reply to: