Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 41728: /trunk/ /trunk/: configure.in
From: Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 10:27:00 +0100
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:52:04PM +0000, gerald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=41728
> User: gerald
> Date: 2012/03/21 03:52 PM
> Log:
>  Don't use GNUTLS 3.0, at least until we determine the impact of their
>  license change.

The answer to this simple licensing question:

Short answer:
Yes, we can, but I will require us to *Distribute* the *binary* under GPLv3+
instead of GPLv2+ on some platforms.

Longer answer:
LGPv3+ *code* can only be mixed with GPLv3+ code (by using the clause in the
license that allows the use of its code under GPLv3+ as well). As Wireshark
is GPLv2+, it is also GPLv3+ and thus when compiled against LGPLv3+ libraries,
the binaries lose the GPLv2 part in order to make it compatible.
*Linking* GPLv2 (without  the +) programs against an LGPLv3+ library *may*
be OK under GPLv2+, as long as the library in question is a "system" library.
And whether a specific library is a system library or not depends - well -
on the system. On most Linux *distros* it will count as a system library,
on Windows probably not, I don't know about Android or OS-X. So if it is not
counted as a system library, you have to use the *code* stuff above.

Now that was simple.


PS: Do you like oxymorons?
Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.