GnuTLS and RFC2712?

Sam Varshavchik mrsam at
Fri Jan 25 00:30:10 CET 2008

Simon Josefsson writes:

> Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav at> writes:
>> On Thursday 24 January 2008, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>>> Btw, Nikos, do you know if there is any license problem to use GPLv3
>>> code with mod_gnutls?  As far as I understand, GPLv3 is compatible with
>>> the Apache license, even though GPLv2 was not compatible.  But I may
>>> have missed some point.
>> No, I already make use of gnutls-extra in mod_gnutls (in 0.5.0-alpha).
> Ok, great.  I considered to put this in a libgnutls-shishi, to avoid
> pulling in Shishi into applications that use libgnutls-extra.  But that
> would slow down building GnuTLS even more, so I'm not sure it is worth
> it.

I can tell you that putting this into a separate libgnutls-shishi will make 
it much easier for distributions to package GnuTLS. Requiring shishi as a 
mandatory prerequisite for libgnutls-extra will have one of three results:

1) Distributions will avoid updating to the newer version of GnuTLS, for 
some period of time.

2) Distributions will patch it out themselves, and factor out the 
shishi-dependent bits into a separate module, and a separate subpackage.

3) Distributions will always package GnuTLS with shishi support turned off 
via configure, (or a configure patch).

Option #3 will be the likely option for distributions that do not include 
shishi at all, making it harder for people who want it, to actually use it 
(forcing them to rebuild GnuTLS for their distribution).

Option #2 will actually encourage distributions that do not presently 
include shishi to add it, and build GnuTLS with shishi support that users 
get by selecting the appropriate subpackage.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20080124/0d081cde/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Gnutls-devel mailing list