lorph <lor...@gmail.com> added the comment: > Do you think that if OpenSSL provided its own implementation of strlen(), > every text that mentions strlen() needs to acknowledge OpenSSL? Do you > realize how ridiculous that is?
If that text is deemed to be advertising by Eric Young and a court of law, then absolutely yes. The license is short, clear, and does not make any exceptions for features that you might deem to be commonplace. http://www.openssl.org/source/license.html I also agree that this is ridiculous, but believing something is ridiculous does not make it any less real as Barnes and Nobles learned the hard way by using Amazon's one-click patent. > The important thing to realize is that libtomcrypt is intentionally written in very portable C. That is great but it leaves a lot on the table. Optimizations for various platforms to take advantage of enhanced instruction sets such as SSE2 and explicit hardware crypto acceleration instructions such as [...] are not likely to be part of libtomcrypt, A quick glance at libtomcrypt tells me otherwise. It is portable C, but it still has inline assembler. It has optimizations using SSE2, x86, x86_64, and PPC32. Even though it might not have that new Intel AES instruction yet, this is the same argument people had for using GMP for python's integers. If there is a problem with multiple libraries, I'd like to reiterate my support for migrating to NSS. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8998> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
