Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Tyler MacDonald <tyler@yi.org> writes:
>> OK, I'm kind of confused about how the legal red tape works here.
>> Debian packages all sorts of GPL code, and both openssl and postgres are
>> released under more liberal licenses. About the only legal issue I could see
>> is the legalities surrounding the export of openssl, but I thought debian
>> had already found it's own way around that.
>
> [ looks in openssl tarball... ] It looks like the openssl license is
> essentially old-style BSD (ie, with advertising clause). If Debian is
> being anal about refusing to ship old-BSD code linked to GPL code,
> there's going to be a whole lot of stuff that doesn't support SSL on
> Debian, not only Postgres. Or are they selectively enforcing this
> policy against PG?
I don't think so. I got curious and looked at what's on my Ubuntu
system: Courier IMAP is GPL with an additional clause that explicitly
allows linking with OpenSSL; Postfix has an Apache-ish license; Exim
is GPL and also explicitly allows linking with OpenSSL; Cyrus IMAP is
BSDish; Apache is non-GPL... I can't think offhand of anything that
is GPL and links with OpenSSL without an explicit clause permitting
same.
-Doug
