El 07/05/12 16:19, Eric Wong escribió: >> flac and metaflac do not use openSSL, only libFLAC does. > > But since flac/metaflac use libFLAC, I suspect (IANAL) the relationship > can be transitive. (But being an optional dependency helps as distros > can avoid potential issues).
That's why it is optional, however there is no such issue, all this incompatibility thing arised of interpretations by debian and the FSF, as far as the rest of the world. openSSL falls into the category of a "system library", twhich falls into the "special exception" clause which allows your GPL-ed program to link against GPL incompatible libraries which are shipped as part of the operating system. > OpenSSL doesn't have a good track record as far as ABI/API stability is > concerned (though I think the hash APIs are more stable). Those compiling and linking against incompatible library versions are doing it wrong, usually happends when users dont get proper packages from distributions or distributor-provided backports. _______________________________________________ flac-dev mailing list flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
