On Wed, Dec 29, 2004 at 04:47:06PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Paul Hampson wrote: > > As I understand it, the issue is that anything in the Debian > > archive is considered to be distributed with Debian, and so > > the GPL's exception for libraries that come with the OS > > doesn't apply since the application also comes with the OS. > > (In GPL's terms, the OS comes with the application)
> Just for completeness, here's the clause in question: > However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need > not include anything that is normally distributed (in either > source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, > kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the > executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the > executable. (GNU GPL ???3) > > However, non-free is not part of Debian (as per the social contract) > > so it would be OK to put GPL'd programs that depend on OpenSSL into > > non-free? > Unfortunatly, it is not clear that openssl is normally distributed > with the other components, as we do not require that people actually > install openssl. > Moreover, if we did claim that it did, the fact that they are both on > the same mirror (in the typical case) leads to the conclusion that > openssl accompanies an executable in non-free. [This becomes a "the > result is not distributable" instead of a "the result is not DFSG > free".] > In the end, your best bet is to either 1) get the exception from the > FreeRadius upstream or 2) port FreeRadius to gnutls. Working around > the problem using non-free really isn't going to work. This permission would have to come from more than just FreeRadius upstream, as it links in a number of other libraries including some that are distributed under the GPL. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer