[Bug 196591] Review Request: bitlbee

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: bitlbee


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196591





------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org  2006-08-01 16:02 EST -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> Well, I still can't see why I should depend on gnutls when openssl is available 
> per default. As from my understanding a bitlbee binary linking to openssl is not 
> more or less probably illegal rather a wget binary linking to openssl (there are 
> many examples more, just try a rpm -e --test openssl). Also said, bitlbee and 
> wget are both licensed under GNU GPL and I absolutely can't see any difference 
> between them. Or did Red Hat do some probably illegal things for Fedora Core?

GPL software linking against OpenSSL should include an exception in the license
to allow this. For instance, the wget README file, it says:

  In addition, as a special exception, the Free Software Foundation
  gives permission to link the code of its release of Wget with the
  OpenSSL project's "OpenSSL" library (or with modified versions of it
  that use the same license as the "OpenSSL" library), and distribute
  the linked executables.  You must obey the GNU General Public License
  in all respects for all of the code used other than "OpenSSL".  If you
  modify this file, you may extend this exception to your version of the
  file, but you are not obligated to do so.  If you do not wish to do
  so, delete this exception statement from your version.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.