On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 07:15:18PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
> Domenico Andreoli told:
>
> [...]
> > i doubt seriously a new package like libcurl3-gnutls is appropriate,
> > but let me know your opinion.
> >
> > is this stuff urgent?
> Yes!
un
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
Domenico Andreoli told:
[...]
> i doubt seriously a new package like libcurl3-gnutls is appropriate,
> but let me know your opinion.
>
> is this stuff urgent?
Yes!
Elimar
--
Learned men are the cisterns of knowledge,
not the fountainheads ;-)
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
Marco d'Itri told:
> On Jul 20, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> i know i'm repeating myself here, but the real fix is to politely
> > solicit the upstream author to change or add a clause to their license
> > that makes such allowances.
On Jul 20, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i think that would solve the problem by muting the symptoms. what happens
> when the next free-but-not-quite-gpl-compatible licensed software is
> linked against libcurl (or something similar)?
Not relevant, gnutls is LGPL'ed.
> i know i'm repe
hi,
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 09:45:09PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> i saw the bug report, i'm sorry to not have commented the request which
> i find absolutely reasonable. i'll try to figure out if curl may suffer
> from limitations due to the use of gnutls in place of openssl.
i would guess
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 03:19:54PM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 09:04:57PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > Why not building curl --without-sssl and --with-gnutls=/usr? Maybe a
> > NMU?
>
> this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
> your packa
* sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050717 21:20]:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 09:04:57PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > Why not building curl --without-sssl and --with-gnutls=/usr? Maybe a
> > NMU?
>
> this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
> your package that is
On 7/17/05, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Upstream developers should get a clue and either properly license their
> software, stop using libcurl or adding gnutls support to it.
Upstream developers (and a lot of other people) should stop believing
the FSF's FUD about how it's not legal
hi,
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 03:40:30PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 7/18/05, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > yes, and the same with libmysqlclient, which is why there's no longer ssl
> > support in the mysql packages :(
>
> Wouldn't it be possible to support SSL transparently i
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 09:29:46AM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> > The same issues as with libcurl applied to libldap2. They were
> > considered a bug in libldap2 back then because half the distribution
> > links it. Gave me a lot of recurring head aches.
>
> yes, and the same with libmysqlclient,
On 7/18/05, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 11:06:13AM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 03:19:54PM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> > > this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
> > > your package that is "b
hi,
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 11:06:13AM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 03:19:54PM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> > this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
> > your package that is "broken". of course you could still file a
>
> The same issues
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 05:16:27AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Bartosz Fenski]
> > Seems that part of developers think that indirect linking with
> > OpenSSL is ok, and part think it's not.
> Yeah. Well. Stand back and look at why this 'linking' thing matters
> in the first place. The p
[Bartosz Fenski]
> Seems that part of developers think that indirect linking with
> OpenSSL is ok, and part think it's not.
Yeah. Well. Stand back and look at why this 'linking' thing matters
in the first place. The point is to determine whether one work is a
"derivative" of another work. If
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 11:07:41AM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> > > apt-get remove --purge libssl0.9.7 gives me tons of packages. Just
> > > an estimation: We need to repack half of all packages then?
> >
> > NO.[1]
> >
> > All that needs to happen is that GPLed packages without an OpenSSL
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 11:09:04PM +0300, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > apt-get remove --purge libssl0.9.7 gives me tons of packages. Just
> > an estimation: We need to repack half of all packages then?
>
> NO.[1]
>
> All that needs to happen is that GP
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 03:19:54PM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> > Why not building curl --without-sssl and --with-gnutls=/usr? Maybe a
> > NMU?
>
> this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
> your package that is "broken". of course you could still file a
The same issue
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 01:02:53AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Don Armstrong]
> > All that needs to happen is that GPLed packages without an OpenSSL
> > linking exception either need to:
>
> 3) For indirect dependencies: make sure you're only using the bits
>of the (for example
[Don Armstrong]
> All that needs to happen is that GPLed packages without an OpenSSL
> linking exception either need to:
>
> 1) Get a linking exception.
> 2) Stop linking with OpenSSL.
3) For indirect dependencies: make sure you're only using the bits
of the (for example) libcurl
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> apt-get remove --purge libssl0.9.7 gives me tons of packages. Just
> an estimation: We need to repack half of all packages then?
NO.[1]
All that needs to happen is that GPLed packages without an OpenSSL
linking exception either need to:
1) Get a
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
sean finney told:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 08:21:00PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > I don't see a gpl'd alternative to curl for internet streaming. I am
> > thinking about to build moc --without-curl then :(
>
> or you could always contact the a
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 09:04:57PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> Why not building curl --without-sssl and --with-gnutls=/usr? Maybe a
> NMU?
this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
your package that is "broken". of course you could still file a
wishlist bug again
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
sean finney told:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 08:21:00PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > I don't see a gpl'd alternative to curl for internet streaming. I am
> > thinking about to build moc --without-curl then :(
>
> or you could always contact the a
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 08:21:00PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> I don't see a gpl'd alternative to curl for internet streaming. I am
> thinking about to build moc --without-curl then :(
or you could always contact the author and inform them of their
self-inflicted license violation. in my e
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
Marco d'Itri told:
> On Jul 17, Elimar Riesebieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > comfortable to build curl against gnutls in general? Any hints?
> Upstream developers should get a clue and either properly license their
> software, stop using libcurl
On Jul 17, Elimar Riesebieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> comfortable to build curl against gnutls in general? Any hints?
Upstream developers should get a clue and either properly license their
software, stop using libcurl or adding gnutls support to it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Descripti
Hi,
I am currently maintaining moc, a _m_usic _o_n _c_onsole player:
http://moc.daper.net
apt-cache show moc
The new version 2.3.0 needs libcurl-dev, 'cause streaming is
possible now. Start using libcurl, which depends on libssl, and
since GPL is incompatible with OpenSSL license, the package wa
27 matches
Mail list logo
