On Sunday, June 23rd, 2024 at 6:35 AM, Bernd Zeimetz <be...@bzed.de> wrote:
> > > Hi, > > > A few days ago, we released Netatalk 3.2.0 which comes bundled with a > > customized subset of WolfSSL as SSL provider. > > However, when I spoke to a Debian developer last year about this very > > topic, they told me that using WolfSSL for packaged software in > > Debian required some kind of special exemption and approval. > > Hi Bernd, > > wolfssl is packaged in Debian, did you try to build netatalk with the > packaged version? > > Debian doesn't like code copies in sources, so if it builds fine with > the packaged version, removing it from the source that ends up in > Debian will fix all issues. > This is a reasonable request. I did try to build with Debian's WolfSSL libraries last year. At the time (September 2023) I concluded that the DES compatibility headers (des.h etc.) were missing altogether from Debian's WolfSSL package, and therefore could not be used for this purpose with Netatalk. Some discussion in https://github.com/Netatalk/netatalk/issues/358 > (I didn't check for licence compabilites and such things, guess you've > done that already). > All of the original WolfSSL codebase is GPLv2 licensed, which is the same license that Netatalk uses. However, a handful of source files (five of them to exact) are licensed under the traditional SSLeay license. They constitute key parts of the OpenSSL compatibility layer... > > Hope that helps, > > Bernd > It helps very much, thank you! Sincerely, Daniel
