On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Thomas Lussnig wrote:
> (or with modified versions of it that use the same license as the "OpenSSL"
> library) I Think this is the hole you mean.
Yes.
> But the whole exeption is only an temporary item.
Sure. Still present though. I just wanted to make people here aware of this.
I always find it interesting with these kinds of exceptions. I mean, I bet a
lot of contributors to wget have that "Fear Of Exploitation" and contributed
their stuff being well aware that the code would be safely "guarded" by the
GPL. But given a huge hole in the wall, a solid door doesn't do much good.
> ... and distribute the linked executables AND MAKE YOUR OWN MODIFICATION
> AVAIBLE UNDER GNU GPL WITH(OUT) THESE EXEPTION.
>
> Think this should fix the problem. But im not an lawer.
How can this fix the problem? OpenSSL allows me to modify it and distribute
binaries without providing source code. So any major changes I'd do when
re-distributing a patched wget would of course be in the "OpenSSL library".
Who's gonna define what that library is or isn't? The exception sure doesn't.
It just says I can link with an "OpenSSL" library and use its license.
--
Daniel Stenberg - http://daniel.haxx.se - +46-705-44 31 77
ech`echo xiun|tr nu oc|sed 'sx\([sx]\)\([xoi]\)xo un\2\1 is xg'`ol
