On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 07:27:31PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 03:40:30AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 03:28:00AM -0800, Joris Huizer wrote: > > > I'll try lynx-ssl then. Are there any probs for that > > > program or should I just use that instead of lynx ? > > > > lynx-ssl is lynx with the crypto stuff compiled in. I believe > > lynx-ssl conflicts with lynx and will remove lynx automatically when > > you install lynx-ssl. > > > > The reason lynx-ssl isn't the default is because crypto type tools are > > illegal in some countries, or subject to bizarre export restrictions > > under dangerous munitions laws in others (namely, the United States). > > The crypto packages are on servers outside the US, so you don't have > > to worry about running afoul of the latter. > > By and large that isn't true any more, as crypto has mostly been merged > into the main archive as of woody. There are still a few holdouts for > various reasons. I believe lynx-ssl is one of them because lynx is GPLed > while OpenSSL is incompatible with the GPL; they won't be merged until > this is resolved. Shouldn't lynx-ssl be pulled from the archive for breaching the license of lynx in the meantime? -rob
Attachment:
pgpMqtC_PxCIq.pgp
Description: PGP signature