FreeTDS Development Group

[Brian Bruns <camber AT ais.org>]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Steve Langasek wrote:

> I've taken the initiative here and commited a fix for goodread() to CVS.
> You can shoot me later if you don't like it ;), but I didn't see any
> objections to the last patch that was posted on the list, and it was
> virtually identical to the patch I'd posted just the day before the
> thread was brought up (modulo better EINTR handling).

Well since you've commited it, I guess that version will be just fine 
unless I hear complaints. ;-)

> Someone should still look at the best way to EINTR when select() is 
> being used -- right now I've added no handling for this.  It's easy 
> enough for me to throw in a '&& errno != EINTR' if people agree that 
> won't cause any other problems; I just don't want that to become a "good 
> enough" solution that never gets revisited.

I wonder if EINTR handling may explain occasional lost connections on some 
busy apache servers that we've heard about.

> > BTW, I've added a '--with-ssl' option to configure which will compile in 
> > NT authentication support.
> 
> A note on this (hmm, this topic seems to be coming up everywhere these
> days) -- because the OpenSSL license is not GPL-compatible (or more to
> the point, LGPL-compatible), it's not legal for third parties to ship
> freetds binaries linked against OpenSSL unless all copyright holders in
> the FreeTDS code agree to adding a license exception allowing this.  For
> Debian, I would definitely rather ship NT auth-enabled binaries; and to
> that end, I hereby grant permission to licensees under the LGPL to link
> any code I've contributed to FreeTDS against the OpenSSL library for the 
> purpose of creating redistributable binaries.  In case we don't get the
> same consent from all other contributors, I'll probably start looking at 
> what would need to be changed to use the GNU TLS library instead.

IANAL! OpenSSL is not GPL compatible, but what about LGPL?  Most of the 
clauses seem to deal with redistribution of openssl, and would affect 
staticly linked versions of freetds I suppose.  I also don't believe we 
fall under "derived works" either, so that knocks out clause 4.  That 
seems to leave clause 3.

 * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
 *    software must display the following acknowledgment:
 *    "This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project
 *    for use in the OpenSSL Toolkit. (http://www.openssl.org/)"

Perhaps some education is in order.  I have no problem granting an 
exemption (and around 90% of the code is my copyright), but I want to make 
sure I understand why it's needed.

Brian