Hi all I have started to look at GNUTLS: I think that as you pointed out this is the long run solution.
Regards Luca On Sep 11, 2010, at 4:30 PM, jor...@linuxgen.com wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 10:55:16PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: >> I am not sure a re-release is really needed, but I'll leave that for >> other debian-legal regulars to comment on. >> >> It seems to me that there's another problem, though! >> >> It looks like ntop links with other libraries, some of which appear to >> be released under the terms of the GNU GPL. >> At a first glance (by looking at the package dependencies only, an ldd >> check is encouraged), I spotted >> http://packages.debian.org/sid/libgdbm3 >> and maybe >> http://packages.debian.org/sid/libfreetype6 >> (which is dual-licensed under the GPL and a custom license, I still >> have to check the latter license and see if it is compatible with >> OpenSSL...) >> >> If all this is confirmed, I would say that adding an OpenSSL linking >> exception to ntop is not enough to solve the compatibility issue >> between ntop and OpenSSL. >> It seems to me that the same linking exception is needed for the linked >> GPL'ed libraries, as well, and should obviously be asked to their >> copyright holders. >> >> As a side note, libgdbm3 is copyrighted by the FSF: I guess an OpenSSL >> linking exception will be difficult to obtain for that library... >> >> >> In summary, I think the best way to solve this issue is porting ntop to >> GNUTLS. > > At this point I am inclined to aggree. I think that SSL support should be > removed from squeeze's version of ntop. I will work on porting GNUTLS for > squeeze+1. > > Thank you for your insight Francesco. > > > Regards, > > Jordan Metzmeier > > --- Keep looking, don't settle - Steve Jobs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
