Once upon a time, Tom spot Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > On 08/05/2009 02:38 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote: > >Apropos, what's the license in case a GPL package links against OpenSSL? > >GPL with exceptions or what? Or is it even allowed? > > So, in this specific case, I'm still arguing with Red Hat Legal, and we > have not determined our final stance. This brings up something I've wondered: if you program to an API where there are multiple implementations, is your program a derived work of one of them, the other, or both? A specific example is OpenSSL and GnuTLS (the OpenSSL compatibility library). The APIs provided are compatible, so how can changing a link option from "-lssl -lcrypto" to "-lgnutls-openssl -lgnutls" change the license I must use? This gets even more confusing (to me anyway) when you look at libraries that are ABI compatible (IIRC LessTif vs. Motif). It is't an issue too much with LessTif, since it is licensed under LGPL, but what if it was GPL? Would swapping out the libraries make a program a derived work of LessTif (and thus fall under the GPL)? -- Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
