[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5066D999.3000208@mccme.ru>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 15:20:57 +0400
From: Alexander Cherepanov <cherepan@...me.ru>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: unrar license is not compatible with gpl, it is not
free at all
On 2012-09-29 04:33, magnum wrote:
> On 29 Sep, 2012, at 2:16 , Milen Rangelov <gat3way@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it is in conflict with GPL because there are imposed restrictions on modifying the code (wondering what kind of a **** would modify a cracker to create archives anyway).
>>
>> OpenSSL falls in the same category with its advertising clause.
>>
>> We have many examples of a "GPL with OpenSSL exception" (like curl for example), but I haven't seen such thing for rar. 7zip is the first example I've seen, thanks for that.
>
> So am I in trouble for merely supervising the de-facto official GitHub repos?
I'm afraid you are. Although I'm not 100% sure -- I don't remember
exactly how GPL is applied to source-only distribution and I don't know
well enough which parts of john are under GPL, who their authors are and
how they interact. Maybe license exception from Solar is enough but
maybe not.
> If I am, I will just drop them without notice and teach my kids a fargin' truckload of foul words.
I think it's possible to distribute rar support as a standalone patch.
If you can separate rar support from the rest of john and make a patch
which doesn't include anything GPL'd then it should be distributable on
its own.
--
Alexander Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
