On Apr 16, 2021, at 20:33, Fred Wright wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2021, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> https://build.macports.org/builders/ports-10.15_x86_64-builder/builds/55652/steps/gather-archives/logs/stdio
>>
>>> "hydrogen" is not distributable because its license "GPL-2" conflicts with
>>> license "OpenSSLException" of dependency "qt5-qtbase"
>>
>> Does this make sense or is there an error in the script? Why would GPL-2 or
>> anything conflict with OpenSSLException? It's just an exception. It lifts
>> some restrictions imposed by the GPL. It shouldn't be imposing additional
>> restrictions itself, should it?
>
> For that matter, IMO this whole business of the OpenSSL license conflicting
> with the GPL is a bunch of nonsense (at least in the typical MacPorts
> scenario). Since when does *dynamically* linking against an *unbundled*
> shared library constitute "redistribution" of said library? And if anyone
> tries to claim that merely including the bits necessary to link against the
> library is "redistribution", the recent SCOTUS ruling in Oracle v. Google
> should put that to rest.
Since you're now asking a different question than what I was asking, let's
retitle the thread.
I'm not aware of the Oracle / Google ruling.
The reason why the OpenSSL license and GPL conflict, unless an exception is
granted, when the OpenSSL is not part of the operating system, is explained
here:
https://people.gnome.org/~markmc/openssl-and-the-gpl
