Quick Links

Re: TODO: GNU TLS

From:	Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To:	"Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc:	pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject:	Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date:	2006-12-28 18:36:55
Message-ID:	20061228183655.GQ24675@kenobi.snowman.net
Views:	Raw Message \| Whole Thread \| Download mbox \| Resend email
Thread:
Lists:	pgsql-hackers

* Joshua D. Drake (jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 13:01 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > OpenSSL isn't compatible with the GPL.
>
> The original discussion stated that well placed attorneys in the market
> feel that the FSF is trying to reach beyond the hands of god on this one
> and that we don't need to worry about it (my words, for actual quote
> read thread ;)).

Yeah, that's nice.

> > We do care because GPL
> > applications link against libpq and therefore can end up linking against
> > OpenSSL. \
>
> Our concern is whether PostgreSQL is legally linked, not if something
> else is. /me is trying to think very hard of a program that is GPL that
> links to to PostgreSQL that would have a problem....

Looking at it from the point of view that psql if fine and therefore
there isn't a problem is *very* short-sighted.

Some of the packages currently in Debian/unstable which are licensed
under the GPL and linked against libpq4 (a few of which have already
provided exceptions for linking against OpenSSL):

And quite a few others, I'm sure, I just got tired of looking.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Re: TODO: GNU TLS at 2006-12-28 18:13:14 from Joshua D. Drake

Responses

Re: TODO: GNU TLS at 2006-12-28 18:46:37 from Joshua D. Drake

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

	From	Date	Subject
Next Message	Joshua D. Drake	2006-12-28 18:46:37	Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Previous Message	Tom Lane	2006-12-28 18:36:00	Re: Recent SIGSEGV failures in buildfarm HEAD