[LINUX5250] GPL vs. OpenSSL license

[Carey Evans <carey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news about laws etc. again, but I've
realised that, due to the interaction between the advertising clause
in the OpenSSL license (conditions 3 and 6), and section 6 of the GNU
GPL, nobody is actually allowed to distribute binaries of tn5250.

This applies to the license on tn5250.c; I'm not sure how it interacts
with the sort-of-GPL on the source for lib5250, but I think the
exception just defers to the license on tn5250.c.

The only way out of this, as far as I know, is for the copyright
holder(s) of the GPL bits of tn5250 to change the license.
Possibilities are to use a less restrictive license like the LGPL (or
MIT or BSD license) instead, or to add an exception for OpenSSL like
some of KDE has for Qt.

--
         Carey Evans  http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/

                             Cavem canus.