On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:24:18AM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 10:50:05AM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > > > However (and this a more important fact that I overlooked), in the case of > > > openssl it would be illegal to link a GPL program with it, since the > > > OpenSSL > > > developers added an advertising clausse that makes it incompatible. A > > > Build-Conflicts should be present in order to avoid this from happening. > > > Alternatively, you could link it with GnuTLS compat layer to see how it > > > works > > > out. > > > > *sight*, i have feared this might be the case. However, i dont quite > > understand the case here. Zabbix does not use any of the openssl headers > > or functions in its code and is nevertheless linking against libcrypto > > which is needed because libsnmp9-dev is linked against openssl. Fabio, > > what do you think about this? Should i start ask Alexei for permission > > about linking against openssl so we are on the safe side? > > after some reading i have the strong impression this is needed (its > basically the same problem as in #147430). I have mailed Upstream about > this, lets hope he accepts to add an exception to his license.
As said in the other mail, it's not clear that this relicensing would be legaly possible. Since there's no technical reason for linking with a library that is not being used, I wouldn't really bother about it. -- Robert Millan ACK STORM, S.L. - http://www.ackstorm.es -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
