[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-mailutils] PostgreSQL support
From: |
Jordi Mallach |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-mailutils] PostgreSQL support |
Date: |
Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:47:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 08:28:17PM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On my latest Debian package update, I've been bitten by a very nice
> problem regarding MySQL support.
>
> As you know, MySQL authors declared the 4.x branch "stable" quite
> recently. It appears libmysqlclient in that distribution was relicensed
> from LGPL to GPL in version 4.0, deliberately. The problem is that
> it's common to find libmysqlclient with SSL support compiled in (using
> OpenSSL), which clashes with the GPL in MySQL due to the GPL
> incompatibility in OpenSSL's license.
>
> In short, I'm not able to compile mailutils with MySQL support as that
> makes mailutils (GPL) link against libssl, non-GPL-compatible.
>
> Debian is forking the old libmysqlclient 3.x packages so we'll have the
> problem solved soon, but this situation will make people violate MU's
> license without being aware very easily.
>
> A solution (besides MySQL fixing this situation) is to add postgresql
> support. :)
>
> Any additional thoughts on this?
>
> Jordi
> --
> Jordi Mallach Pérez -- Debian developer http://www.debian.org/
> address@hidden address@hidden http://www.sindominio.net/
> GnuPG public key information available at http://oskuro.net/~jordi/
On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 11:48:51PM +0300, Sergey Poznyakoff wrote:
> > In short, I'm not able to compile mailutils with MySQL support as that
> > makes mailutils (GPL) link against libssl, non-GPL-compatible.
>
> I don't see why it is not allowed. It is true that OpenSSL is
> distributed under a dual license that is not compatible with GPL.
> However both of its licenses are BSD-style Open Source licenses and
> therefore linking against the library should be allowed, just as it
> was allowed to link against libraries distributed under the original BSD
> license with the ``obnoxious BSD advertising clause''.
>
> Anyway, my proposition is that we should forward this question to
> <address@hidden>.
Well, Debian has always considered the OpenSSL licence as non-GPL
compatible (and many packages have been rejected because of this until
they got a special additional clause which allowed linking against
OpenSSL). I think the offending clause is:
* The licence and distribution terms for any publically available version or
* derivative of this code cannot be changed. i.e. this code cannot simply be
* copied and put under another distribution licence
* [including the GNU Public Licence.]
Was it really allowed to link GPL apps against the original BSD licence?
Jordi
--
Jordi Mallach Pérez -- Debian developer http://www.debian.org/
address@hidden address@hidden http://www.sindominio.net/
GnuPG public key information available at http://oskuro.net/~jordi/
pgpa2OOMB_KYJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature