Re: [Bug-gnubg] Serious bug: Random.org - Important Request for Comments

[Russ Allbery]

Michael Petch <address@hidden> writes:

> This isn't my view. Hypothetically assume we use OpenSSL on the back end
> of libcurl. Since our project is GPL'ed and we are linking with libcurl
> we are also linking against openssl (to support that backend). The end
> result of building binaries of our project is that it is going to link
> directly or indirectly with OpenSSL and I believe that it would still
> require our product to contain an exception to allow for this (or
> alternatively use something on the backend with a license that is
> compatible).

That's Debian's position as well, so we always link GPL-covered packages
against the GnuTLS build of libcurl in the Debian archives.

This is all reasonably straightforward for the Linux distributions (and as
the Debian packager, libcurl is certainly fine with me).  It's the Mac and
Windows binaries that will be the tricky part from a licensing standpoint.
I don't really have any further suggestions to offer other than what you
already spelled out (I know almost nothing about developing on Windows or
Mac OS X), but I concur with your analysis.

-- 
Russ Allbery (address@hidden)              <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>