RFC: GNU Crypto and Jessie (again)

[Casey Marshall]

Hi,

I've finished splitting GNU Crypto along "weak" and "strong" lines,  
reformatted the code in GNU Crypto, and added the correct copyright  
headers to all the files. The resulting patch, and zip file of new  
files is here:


  
  

You need both files; the patch is against a recent Classpath CVS  
snapshot, and does contain a few miscellaneous fixes outside of  
supporting GNU Crypto and Jessie, to make sure SSL connections  
actually work. The zip file can be unpacked in the toplevel Classpath  
directory. There are no changes to the build system (I don't know if  
the GCJ support needs changing at all; I don't use it, so I can't tell).


The weak/strong split breaks out ciphers, MACs, key exchanges, and  
classes depending on those into `gnu/javax/crypto,' which can be  
removed almost entirely (you'll need to keep only `gnu/javax/crypto/ 
GnuDHPrivateKey.java,' though maybe that class should be moved), and  
removing `gnu/javax/net/ssl' will remove all strong crypto.


This should not break anything existing in Classpath; instead, it  
should just add functionality mostly "behind the scenes," so I think  
it's safe to just check this in. I will, however, wait for some  
discussion and testing, to make sure something obvious isn't missing.


I used `efj,' the Eclipse source formatter, to reformat the code. It  
doesn't always do the right thing, so there may be some formatting  
inconsistencies scattered around (mostly when breaking long lines).  
There is still some code duplication here and there, say when two  
different implementations (like RSA encryption and signatures) use  
their own Key classes. The duplication isn't major, however, and we  
can sort it out later on. Some things, like Diffie Hellman, are  
duplicated, but not in a clean way --- Classpath's DH implementation  
is written to the JCE API, while GNU Crypto's is not (and, the latter  
is used by Jessie). Again, I hope these issues aren't blockers,  
because I'd like to get this merged as soon as possible, lest my  
schedule block me from finally doing it.


Thanks.


___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath

Re: Classpath 0.20 successfully built with Cygwin

[Dalibor Topic]

Enrico Migliore wrote:

Dalibor Topic wrote:


Enrico Migliore wrote:


Christian Thalinger wrote:



Ok, got it compiled but only with the first patch Dalibor suggested.
Thanks.

TWISTI

 


Hi Christian,

perfect! That means that the patch is needed.



The first patch is necessary for jikes 1.22, the second one for jikes 
CVS head. I'll make that clearer in kaffe's docs.


cheers,
dalibor topic


Hi Dalibor,

What prevents the commiters to apply that simple patch to the repository?



I am not sure which patch and which repository we are talking about. If 
you are talking about a patch to Kaffe's docs, I'll add a comment there 
in a minute about the second patch being for CVS head of jikes. If you 
are talking about Jikes, then you'll have to talk with jikes developers, 
though.


cheers,
dalibor topic


___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath

Re: Win CE port

[Per Bothner]

Roman Kennke wrote:

Hi there,

Am Freitag, den 20.01.2006, 13:05 -0800 schrieb Per Bothner:


Mark Wielaard wrote:


Hi Phillipe,

On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 15:03 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote:


   It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed 
in a commercial product.



There should be no trouble at all freely redistributing such a thing in
a commercial product. Just make sure you distribute the source code for
it to your users.


Just to clarify:

Depends what you mean by "it".  If you mean the VM, that may not be
enough, since in an embedded environment it is likely the VM is linked
in with the commercial product.  In that case you may also have to
freely redistributing source for the commercial product.




AFAICS this is true for the GPL, but not so with the GPL+linking
exception under which GNU Classpath is distibuted. Maybe someone with
more insight in the license (Mark? Dalibor?) could clarify this?


Correct, but the comment was "GPL VM".  I assumed he was talking about
a "VM" that was GPL'd - not the Classpath libraries - which do not
include a VM.
--
--Per Bothner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://per.bothner.com/


___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath

Re: Classpath 0.20 successfully built with Cygwin

[Enrico Migliore]

Dalibor Topic wrote:


Enrico Migliore wrote:


Christian Thalinger wrote:



Ok, got it compiled but only with the first patch Dalibor suggested.
Thanks.

TWISTI

 


Hi Christian,

perfect! That means that the patch is needed.



The first patch is necessary for jikes 1.22, the second one for jikes 
CVS head. I'll make that clearer in kaffe's docs.


cheers,
dalibor topic


Hi Dalibor,

What prevents the commiters to apply that simple patch to the repository?

Enrico



___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath

Re: Win CE port

[Dalibor Topic]

Philippe Laporte wrote:

Hi,
It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed 
in a commercial product.


You can use and redistribute a GPLd VM, just like how you can use or 
redistribute GNU/Linux in products. You need to comply with the 
provisions of the GPL for the code you license from third parties under 
the GPL, of course, be it a VM or the Linux kernel, but that part is the 
same for any code under any license.


If you have questions and doubts regarding the precise legal effects of 
the GPL in your situation, a wise choice is to ask a lawyer familar with 
the GPL, like FSF's GPL-compliance lab, or, if you are interested in the 
opinion of the people whose code you intend to use, you should ask the 
affected projects, who may be familar with your use case.


That being said, if using a LGPLd VM works well for you, by all means 
just use that.


Since I've talked with you recently on the Kaffe lists, I assume the 
GPLd VM in this case is Kaffe, so I'll add that distributing a build of 
Kaffe for Windows CE is fine, as long as you follow GPL's provisions 
regarding the redistribution (i.e. all users receiving the executables 
from you can get the source code for that particular Kaffe build with 
all your patches and extensions to it).


As Per said, there are cases in embedded software development when 
external factors make it very hard to follow GPL's provisions, so if 
you, for example, wanted to inject a GPLd VM directly into the 
proprietary WinCE kernel, you'd have to clear that with Microsoft first.


I'd additionally suggest making sure that your users understand that the 
license, which covers your non-GPLd product does not cover the GPLd VM, 
and vice versa  ... so users know they receive two separate products, at 
least one of which they can use, study, modify and redistribute freely 
themselves, namely the GPLd VM, in that case.


cheers,
dalibor topic


___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath

Re: Classpath 0.20 successfully built with Cygwin

[Dalibor Topic]

Enrico Migliore wrote:

Christian Thalinger wrote:



Ok, got it compiled but only with the first patch Dalibor suggested.
Thanks.

TWISTI

 


Hi Christian,

perfect! That means that the patch is needed.



The first patch is necessary for jikes 1.22, the second one for jikes 
CVS head. I'll make that clearer in kaffe's docs.


cheers,
dalibor topic


___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath