Re: no mutt-ssl but we can have apacvhe-ssl? what's the deal?

[cjw44@flatline.org.uk (Colin Watson)]

Erik Steffl <steffl@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>  the README.Debian for mutt says:
>
>SSL support
>~~~~~~~~~~~
>SSL support has been disabled because debian cannot legally distribute
>binaries of a GPLed program like mutt linked with a library with a
>four clauses BSD-style license like the one of OpenSSL.
>If you want SSL support you'll have to install the libssl09-dev package
>and recompile the package yourself after editing debian/rules.
>No source changes are needed.
>
>  there are other *-ssl packages like apache ssl. why can't we have
>mutt-ssl?

Apache isn't GPLed, but mutt is, hence why mutt has this problem but
Apache doesn't. Somebody needs to convince either the OpenSSL developers
to remove the advertising clause from their licence or the mutt
developers to include a special exception for OpenSSL - preferably the
former.

-- 
Colin Watson                                     [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]