dlls/advapi32/crypt.c

[Gavriel State]

Patrik Stridvall wrote:
> 
> > On another note, however, I was re-reading the CryptoAPI
> > thread and I don't
> > think that Vladimir Vukicevic's questions were really
> > answered from September
> > 3rd.
> 
> Can you be a little more specific?
> 
> As far using GPL:ed libraries, that is a question that
> really can't be properly answered without a real court
> case.

I think that Vladimir's suggestion that OpenSSL could be
used as an alternative back end did not recieve sufficient
attention.  He wasn't sure that that was a good approach 
given the fact that it would arguably cause difficulty for
people who wanted to run GPLed apps on top of Wine+OpenSSL.

Since the number of GPLed Windows apps that do not have Linux
counterparts is vanishingly small, the OpenSSL option seems to 
me more appropriate than using a libgcrypt back end.  The 
OpenSSL license does not have the viral properties that the
GPL has (it's an old-style BSD-type license, complete with the
advertising clause),  and therefore we should be able to weak-link
Wine with libOpenSSL without any license contamination.  Packagers
who distribute libOpenSSL with Wine would then be responsible
for meeting the OpenSSL license requirements for advertising 
and attribution.

That said on the licensing side, I have no idea whether the 
OpenSSL code actually provides the functionality we need to 
implement the CryptoAPIs.  Has anyone looked into this yet?

The other alternative is to ask the libgcrypt team if they 
are willing to consider LGPL-ing their library so that we 
can use it.  Has anyone asked?

 -Gav

-- 
Gavriel State, CEO
TransGaming Technologies Inc.
http://www.transgaming.com
gav at transgaming.com