freeradius + tls/peap support

[Chan Chung Hang Christopher]

Soren Hansen wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:18:41PM +0800, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
>   
>> What is the deal with disabling support for tls/peap and going so far
>> as to check for linking to libssl in the rules file to break building
>> the package with openssl support?
>>     
>
> /usr/share/doc/freeradius/copyright explains it:
> ----
> Some GPL parts of this software depend on OpenSSL, the combination of
> which cannot be distributed in compiled binary form.
> ----
>   
http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html#LEGAL2

Maybe somebody can get the freeradius folks to clarify things. Or should 
it be the other way round? After all, use != distribution...

> The debian/rules snippet is presumably there to ensure that noone
> accidentally uploads something to the archive in Debian (from whence
> this this change originated) that violates this.
>
> One could argue that we can reasonably safely remove this, because we
> always build packages in a clean environment[1], and we have little
> benefit from preventing people from building them locally and using them
> locally.  They are simply undistributable, so as long as we never have
> them in the archive, we're in the clear, no?
Or add a comment to rules about the need to comment out the check if one 
wants to rebuild freeradius with tls/peap support. But since you do not 
have to recompile everything anyway, it is really not a big deal. I just 
wanted to know why what look like drastic measures are in place.