Subject: Re: OpenSSL is not compatible with C++?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, tech-userlevel@NetBSD.org>
From: John Nemeth <email@example.com>
Date: 09/20/2005 15:46:32
On Feb 10, 4:17pm, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
} On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 01:03:03 -0700, John Nemeth wrote:
} > On Jan 27, 9:33am, Martin Husemann wrote:
} > }
} > } I seriously think all those prototypes/nested macros should be fixed to
} > } include all the arguments, and then a patch be fed back to the openssl
} > } folks (not that they have incorporated suggestions in the past - maybe we
} > } should switch to something sane (TM))
} > What alternatives are out there? I know about GnuTLS, but that
} > comes with LGPL, so it probably isn't suitable for inclusion in the
} > base system.
} There is also NSS:
This is licensable under the Mozilla Public Licence, GPL, and
LGPL. I just looked over the MPL and it has one of those terms saying
that you have to distribute the source code for any modifications that
you make. This would seem to make unsuitable for inclusion in NetBSD.
}-- End of excerpt from Pavel Cahyna