On Tuesday, 3 de January de 2012 11.31.17, [email protected] wrote: > On 03/01/2012, at 11:27 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Tuesday, 3 de January de 2012 10.57.11, [email protected] wrote: > >> Unfortunately, OpenSSL is not part of the LSB, so if you want SSL support > >> on linux and you want your application to be LSB compliant, you end up > >> having to link in the OpenSSL libraries statically. That's not > >> necessarily a bad thing from a security point of view, but it is an > >> annoyance. NSS, on the other hand, *is* in the LSB. If NSS was able to > >> meet Qt's needs, then it would be useful to have a NSS backend. > >> Obviously, if NSS has issues as you mentioned, then that makes it a bit > >> of a moot point. I don't think GnuTLS is in the LSB, but the LSB > >> navigator site is currently down so I can't easily check. > > > > I remember voicing my concerns about NSS when LSB decided to standardise > > on > > it. The reason was then that Qt could *not* use NSS, since it was > > developed in the US. > > Is it still a concern now though after the US changed it's export > restrictions last year?
I don't know because I don't know what changed.
Note that Qt Commercial does not benefit from the Open Source provisions of
those restrictions. They need to be almost entirely gone for Qt to be able to
use a US-developed encryption framework.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027
Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
