Hi,
the bacula upstream sources contain the SHA1 implementation from the
RFC. For the Debian packages, we delete the files sha1.* and repackage
the source (for the complete history, see bug #658326).
Using codesearch, I found that other packages use the implementation by
Steve Reid and submitted
(Dropping cups-devel@, adding debian-printing@ and ftpmasters)
Le mercredi, 8 novembre 2017, 22.53:51 h CET Ben Finney a écrit :
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
> > Is Apple going with "pristine" Apache License 2.0 [1] without further
> > exceptions?
>
> That's an important question. I don't thin
* Carsten Leonhardt:
>> 1. What is wrong with the current SHA1 code/license? For me the
>> license is very much like a BSD license and I don't see a problem with
>> it on the license stand point.
>
> AFAIR the problem is that the RFC is not to be modified, and the code
> came as part of the RFC, s
Florian Weimer writes:
> The apparent intent, as evidenced by the copyright statement in the
> source code parts of RFC 6234, is that the code parts are available
> under that licensing option, even though they are not otherwise marked
> as code components under the TLP.
So in essence the code i
4 matches
Mail list logo
