On Sat, 2010-03-20 at 12:03 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Richard A Nelson <cow...@debian.org> writes: [...] > > For interoperability, OpenSSL is much better, but there is apparently > > still some amount of work to be done on license exemptions (how much?), > > and even if that were done, it'd take a bit of work to switch everything > > back to it ... if there was concensus > > The primary problem with using OpenSSL with OpenLDAP is NSS and PAM > modules, which pull the libraries into just about any GPL'd (or > other-licensed) package in the distribution in one way or another. [...]
Applications that use NSS/PAM, and individual NSS/PAM modules, are
useful without the other and it is a matter of user configuration
whether they are used together at all. The OpenLDAP modules are not
used by default. So I don't see that copyleft licences of applications
using NSS/PAM can possibly extend to them.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat.
- John Lehman, Secretary of the US Navy 1981-1987
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
