> No. We are talking about removing a GPL infected library from the base
> tree that is used by a couple of utterly performance irrelevant utilities
> and making these couple of utilities (secure-rpc key generation tools)
> use the OpenSSL bignum API - where OpenSSL has a BSD-style license.
> This has absolutely no effect on openssl at all.
> > Really? This hardly seems like a good idea.
> No. We can't plug libgmp into openssl anyway due to GPL infection and the
> resulting license conflicts. openssl *explicitly* may not be distributed
> under GPL. And building libgmp into openssl would require exactly that.
Oh, I see.
Nevermind then, sounds good. (Somehow I missed the libgmp<->GPL
(Apologies to the CC's who didn't need this aside.)
> Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message