El Lunes, 22 de Junio de 2009, Juha Heinanen escribió: I could try to compile Kamailio with libcurl4-openssl-dev (changing the debian control file). Any issue with it? In case both packages are valid, which is supposed to be the "correct way"? -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)aliax.net>

Iñaki Baz Castillo writes: http_query function will use tls if url has https scheme. -- juha

Iñaki Baz Castillo schrieb: I think there is no difference in functionality - just differences in licensing. regards klaus

On 23-06 10:02, Klaus Darilion wrote: http://www.mail-archive.com/lftp-devel@uniyar.ac.ru/msg01486.html and I have seen more such reports. Openssl received lots of speed optimizations over time, unlike gnutls. Jan.

On Dienstag, 23. Juni 2009, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: Hi Iñaki, this would mean that the utils module can't be packaged with (official) debian anymore, as the licence of openssl don't allow it. This is basically the same problem as with the tls support, which is disabled in the debian package as well. Henning

On 06/23/2009 01:18 PM, Henning Westerholt wrote: is it inherited in this case? the tls implementation in core of kamailio is binding directly to openssl library and therefore need for the gpl disclaimer, but in this case utils binds to curl library. In sip router this is fixed I guess and tls is shipped with debs -- anyhow, tls is a module in sr, the core is the same. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com/

2009/6/23 Jan Janak <jan(a)iptel.org>rg>: I was thinking exactly the same. The debian files in SR repository are intended to build DEB packages, nothing related to Debian official repositories. If Debian wants to provide official SR packages, them they could choose to use the GnuTLs version instead (by creating their own "control" file). 100% agree. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)aliax.net>

On 23-06 14:54, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: No, the binary package will depend on libcurl3-gnutls and libgnutls. The OpenSSL license contains a clause which, according to the FSF, is incompatible with GPL. (The clause requires certain text to be present in all material). Thus GPL software, such as SER/Kamailio/sip-router, build with openssl is not GPL compatible anymore. The solution suggested by the OpenSSL project is to add an exception to the license which explicitly permits to use the sofware with OpenSSL. This kind of change needs to be approved by all (c) holders. In our case we would need to get the approval from *all* contributors to both projects, which is probably not feasible. IANAL but this applies to the whole source tree, not just selected modules that use openssl. To me this looks like a catch-22 situation more than a real licensing issue. The OpenSSL license requires that extra acknowledgement in all documents and according to FSF this make the license more restrictive than GPL itself. So, a .deb package of ser/kamailio/sr build with OpenSSL is not GPL compatible anymore and this violates the license of the project if such package is distributed. I seriously doubt that we could find a single (c)-owner in both projects who would be opposed to adding the exception to the license, so in my opinion the problem is purely procedural--it is difficult to make a list of all contributors and approach them individually. Opinions differ on this, but Debian people think so. By distributing binary packages of GPL software linked with openssl (and without the exception in the license) they are afraid that they would violate the terms of GPL. Debian probably wants to stay on the safe side, which is understandable given the sheer volume of software they distribute. Jan. PS: IANAL so do not trust a single word I just wrote.

El Martes, 23 de Junio de 2009, Jan Janak escribió: However, the deb packages generated by "make deb" are not necessarily those to be deitributed by Debian, rigth? So we can use OpenSSL in our deb packages and Debian (or Alioth) could recompile the packages with GnuTLS in order to provide them in their public repositories. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)aliax.net>

2009/6/23 Juha Heinanen <jh(a)tutpro.com>om>: I've changed the dependencies in kamailio trunk version (local copy) and it compiles fine. So, if there is no inconvenient I will commit it. However, I've realized that the Debian control file says: Maintainer: Debian VoIP Team <pkg-voip-maintainers(a)lists.alioth.debian.org> Uploaders: Kilian Krause <kilian(a)debian.org> Perhaps we should change these values and use some "internal" name (as "Kamailio Developers Team")? And when the packages become Debian "official" packages (or those mantained by Alioth) they could rename de Mantainer and Uploaders, and could also change the dependencies not to use OpenSSL. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)aliax.net>