Hi, On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 04:03:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > [...] In particular, the > OpenSSL license is probably not GPL compatible, due to both an explicit > "You can't use this code under the GPL"-esque clause, and two or three > obnoxious advertising clauses. It not only has the obnoxious advertising clauses, but it also has the Apache style "trademark" clauses (Products derived from this software may not be called [some words]).
> This doesn't make OpenSSL non-free, but it does cause problems for a > number of packages in the archive which both appear to be under the GPL, > and which are linked against openssl. Maybe some of the programs can be build against the Network Security Services (NSS) library from the Mozilla project which is dual-licensed under the MPL and the GPL which should be compatible with most other licenses. <http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/> This is what the mutt project did when it was pointed out to them that mutt (under GPL) could not be combined (and distributed as a new derived work) with OpenSSL. I believe the new new Mozilla packages include NSS as seperate libraries in the libnss3 and libnss-dev packages but I haven't tried them yet. Cheers, Mark -- Stuff to read: <http://www.toad.com/gnu/whatswrong.html> What's Wrong with Copy Protection, by John Gilmore
