On Monday 12 December 2005 01:45, Anthony Green wrote: > On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 15:19 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > If there are situations where you are not able to (re)distribute > > the GNU Classpath source code and/or follow the the BIS/ENC > > notification procedures as done by the various GNU/Linux distros to > > distribute binary derivatives of GNU Classpath as Free Software > > works then please let us know. > > I don't think my situation is relevant to public Linux distros. > > I'm told the rules are different when you want to make a private > distribution of FOSS crypto code (ie. not easily found on a public > web/ftp site). In my specific case, it's easier just to remove the > problematic code completely.
would adding a second Provider --that supplies the strong stuff; i.e. ciphers, modes, padding, etc..-- living in its own package sub-directory/hierarchy and eventually (when the segmentation of Classpath into multiple jars occur) be packaged in its own jar help solve your problem? cheers; rsn
pgpwTIeTvE2l2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
