Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I would love to, believe me. Unfortunately the main code base is GPL > and the unrar code is licensed incompatibly.
It doesn't look as if fixing this licensing problem is a top priority on upstream's list. Which is fine. They apparently operate in a slightly different value system. > The problem is not, as many people seem to believe, that Debian > doesn't want the unrar code because it's not free. The problem is > that combining the code bases produces a work that we cannot > distribute. We can't distribute libclamav in main if it is linked to the unrar code _in a way that constitutes a hard dependency_. > Some various solutions have been discussed with upstream, but it is > up to upstream to implement one of them - I am not going to add the > code complexity as a Debian specific patch. Excuse me? The dlopen() patch I provided in #484670 for 0.94 is just over 30 lines[1], including comments, and affects only one .c and one .h file. There is really not _that_ much added complexity. And the patch has been tested for weeks here in a production setup. Upstream is more likely to implement a fix for the issue if we provide working code which is exactly what I have done here. Please, accept the patch as part of the package so it gets more widely tested and finally accepted by upstream. If we want to provide a solution that is helpful for our users, we'll have to provide it ourselves. Upstream is not going to do it. If we don't want to provide that helpful solution, it would be more honest to remove clamav from the archive. Cheers, -Hilko [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=484670#46 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
