[Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#428385: Bug#428385: GPLv3 and OpenSSL

[Steve Langasek]

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:59:43PM +0800, James Andrewartha wrote:

> >FWIW, it seems to be the FSF's position that the rewritten "system
> >libraries" exception in GPLv3 does *not* apply to libraries such as 
> >OpenSSL,
> >only to libraries that constitute "language runtimes".  I don't think this
> >follows directly from the license as written, but it seems once again to at
> >least be a /tenable/ position for the FSF to hold, so we're no better off
> >vis à vis OpenSSL under GPLv3 than we were under GPLv2.

> >Discussion of this can be found in the debian-legal list archives for July.

> Ah, http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00237.html and 
> following. It does mean that GPLv3 users of PAM are ok, since PAM is 
> definitely a system library.

Not according to Brett; libpam is not a language runtime.

PAM is ok for GPLv3 for the reason that Linux-PAM is explicitly licensed for
distribution under the terms of the GPL.

> Shane, Anthony - Did you get a response from Brett Smith regarding 
> Anthony's most recent post to debian-legal? I can't see anything since 
> then on debian-legal.

I spoke with Brett at OSCON last month, where he promised to follow up to
the thread.  I guess he hasn't found the spare cycles yet. :)

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon at debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/