On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 01:33:43PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> writes: > > On Sat, 2010-03-20 at 12:03 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> 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. > > My understanding is that that's not the standard that Debian has > historically applied, and I don't think it's particularly useful for > anyone who isn't a lawyer (such as myself) to debate it. should there be a usertag 'lawyer' to note which bugs should not be decided by a hacker but a real lawyer? Has a real lawyer even been used to solve a bug in Debian? -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | http://kevix.myopenid.com | | : :' : The Universal OS | mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/ | | `. `' http://www.debian.org/ | http://counter.li.org [#238656]| |___`-____Unless I ask to be CCd, assume I am subscribed _________|
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100320210232.ga24...@horacrux
