On Monday 09 February 2009 17:09:19 Philipp Geschke wrote:
  

Hi,

I dared to CC Kern... maybe he can enlighten us?
    

:-)

For me the problem has been solved for quite a lot time (I rewrote all 3rd
party GPL code that we used in the source). Unfortunately, the problem is not
yet resolved for Debian users, because the solution is in the development
code which is not yet released for "production".   It is currently undergoing
beta testing, and hopefully it will be released in late March or April.

Best regards,

Kern

  

John Goerzen schrieb:
    

Lukasz Szybalski wrote:
      

Hello,

So it seems like openssl is already back in main repository. (I think
it was in contrib before).
Here are the bugs for debian. I don't see a bug for openssl support.

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?package=bacula

What you are saying is that bacula should be compiled with with tls
support? If yes we should submit a bug request.

I'm cc'ing a maintainer.
        

Please see NEWS.Debian.gz in the bacula-common package.  This is
somewhat of a FAQ by now.

The problem is not that the license for Bacula is non-free, or that the
license for OpenSSL is non-free, but that the two are not compatible.

ISTR hearing from someone (Kern maybe) that the Bacula license may be
revised in the future to eliminate this problem.

Note that README.Debian contains instructions to build your own bacula
with SSL/TLS support, which is a quite easy procedure.
      

I didn't really dig into the issue itself, so I can't tell if it has been
removed. I am refering to this post from Landon Fuller:
http://www.adsm.org/lists/html/Bacula-users/2008-08/msg00634.html

It is all about this:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00144.html

Wether or not the package is compiled with tls support is really up to the
maintainer, but in Debian Etch it was (The version used in Sarge did not
have tls support).

My understanding was, that Kern changed the Bacula code to solve the
problem.

I think a lot of people are using the Debian packages, either in Debian or
in Ubuntu, and this could really become annoying, if unnecessary.

--
Philipp

    

-- John

      

Thanks,
Lucas

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 11:47 PM, Philipp Geschke <bacula AT pgmail DOT net>
        

wrote:
  

Hi,

I asked basically the same thing a while ago:
http://www.adsm.org/lists/html/Bacula-users/2008-08/msg00517.html

Back then I was told, that the issue had been removed, but the Debian
project seems to not have noticed this.

Basically, while asking about Ubuntu, this really is a Debian Lenny
problem, meaning that a lot of people will have a lot of fun starting
this very weekend.

Since I don't think that filing a bug report or talking to somebody
will get the release changed before Feb. 14th, all you can do is, sit
back, go with the recompiling or compile a current version by hand, and
enjoy the show. But feel free to contact whoever you like anyways.


Even though I have to ask: If Kern was in ongoing discussion with the
debian-legal list about the license issue, how come they never heard of
it being resolved?
Or did I get this part of the story wrong?


--
Philipp

Bill Merriam schrieb:
          

It appears Debian still doesn't distribute bacula packages with
encryption enabled.  Is there any news on that?

There are instructions included with the debian package source on how
to rebuild it with encryption.  Has anybody done that and made the
packages available?

I am trying to figure out how to use the debian package building
system.  If I succeed in building encryption enabled binary packages
should I distribute them somehow?

Bill

----------------------------------------------------------------------