Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] RADIUS's "Message Authenticator"

[Hamish Moffatt <hamish@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 07:40:00PM -0600, David Frascone wrote:
> Ok.  Good example.  But, what about libc under Solaris.  It's just 

That's specifically covered by the GPL. Source is not required for
libraries that usually accompany the system.

> > As free software authors we should not be trying to evade a free 
> > software license - especially the license of the product we are 
> > working on!
> 
> I don't think we're evading a license.  If OpenSSL was GPL, then there
> would be no discussion going on.  We're trying to use another free
> library, with a *less* restrictive license than our own.  We seem to

We're evading Ethereal's license! And we are only free to change
Ethereal's license to allow this with the consent of the authors,
of which there are 188.

> have no problem linking with libraries with *more* restrictive licenses
> (i.e. libc under HP/UX, Solaris, and, God forbid, MS Windows), but are

GPL exemption, as above.

> having many issues linking to a less restrictive one.  And, we're even
> (If we take my runtime only linking approach) completly avoiding any
> source code contamination by linking only at run time.

I can't see the difference between dlopen and just dynamic linking.

> I say let's do it.  I seriously doubt anyone will complain.  And, if
> *anyone* does (even one author), then we just throw out the changes. 

How about sending a one time email to every listed contributor?
No reply = consent.

Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@xxxxxxxxxx> <hamish@xxxxxxxxxxxx>