musl - Re: High-priority library replacements?

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 16:40:03 +0200
From: Daniel Cegiełka <daniel.cegielka@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: High-priority library replacements?

2013/5/9 Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>:

>> btw.  license issue - can we legally link noxcuse (GPL) with musl (MIT)? :)
>
> Of course; otherwise musl would be rather useless since there's a huge
> corpus of GPL code you want to link and run. The point of a permissive
> license is that it does not restrict you from doing things like this.

My question was a joke, which was to show how absurd case we have now
- instead of software freedom we have concerns.

> BTW, I'll probably relicense noxcuse anyway.

This is the result of frustration:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
http://www.wtfpl.net/about/


btw. OpenSSL.org published a small version of openssl-fips. It
contains only FIPS 140-2 validated code.

http://www.openssl.org/source/
http://www.openssl.org/docs/fips/fipsnotes.html

OpeSSL-fips vs CyaSSL (musl)

# ls -lh /var/tmp/ports/cyassl/image/usr/lib/
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root       866.9k May  9 09:13 libcyassl.a
-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root       659.6k May  9 09:13 libcyassl.so.5.0.0

# ls -lh /usr/local/ssl/fips-2.0/lib/
-r--r--r--    1 root     root       685.7k May  9 12:34 fipscanister.o

thx,
Daniel