From: “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@amaranth.com>
To: tzeruch@ceddec.com
Message Hash: 3949faaa751df45651d98253b598936f2ec5d585bf6dee88932f7d751fc43a65
Message ID: <199708111937.OAA05635@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Reply To: <97Aug11.145941edt.32258@brickwall.ceddec.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-08-11 21:07:56 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 05:07:56 +0800
From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 05:07:56 +0800
To: tzeruch@ceddec.com
Subject: Re: Can't touch this, ugly Americans! (PGP License file)
In-Reply-To: <97Aug11.145941edt.32258@brickwall.ceddec.com>
Message-ID: <199708111937.OAA05635@mailhub.amaranth.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <97Aug11.145941edt.32258@brickwall.ceddec.com>, on 08/11/97
at 03:00 PM, nospam-seesignature@ceddec.com said:
>On Mon, 11 Aug 1997, Adam Shostack wrote:
>> First off, congratulations and thanks to Stale and everyone else for
>> scanning in the source to PGP5.0i (http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/)
>>
>> However, theres an ugly problem with the license.
>> (http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/pgp50i-license.txt)
>>
>> In Section 1.c.(d), permission is given to port PGP to other
>> platforms. However, permission to distribute those ports is
>> explicitly denied.
>>
>> Could the license be modified to allow people who port the software to
>> redisctribute ports? There is enough FUD about using PGP without PGP,
>> Inc contributing to that by overly tight licensing.
>>
>> Adam
>Or what do you do about bugs? It mentions corrections, but not who to
>send them to.
>On DEC Alpha/axp under Linux, include/pgpUsuals.h has a test for a big
>ULONG_MAX that defines HAVE64 as 1 on 64 bit machines like the alpha
>But the very next test has #ifndef HAVE64 where there is a typedef for
>word64, which won't happen. But if HAVE64 is 1, in pgpMD5.c it will
>really want word64 defined or it will bomb.
>Something is wrong, but if I copy the typedef, it seems to get further
>(compiling as we speak - the old UDBs aren't the fastest alphas).
>Now, where should I send this information or the patch?
Here is a patch I received for the pgpUsuals.h file:
There is a bug in src/lib/pgp/include/pgpUsuals.h on 64-bit machines. The
appended patch seems to cure the problem --- the word64 type needs to be
defined, even when the machine has a native 64-bit type.
*** src/lib/pgp/include/pgpUsuals.h~ Sat Aug 9 22:44:58 1997 ---
src/lib/pgp/include/pgpUsuals.h Mon Aug 11 11:03:38 1997
***************
*** 52,57 ****
- --- 52,58 ----
#if ULONG_MAX == 0xfffffffffffffffful
typedef ulong bnword64;
#define BNWORD64 bnword64
+ typedef ulong word64;
#define HAVE64 1
#endif
#endif
- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0
Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000
iQCVAwUBM+9cF49Co1n+aLhhAQEtSAQAyF1tsGfk7gxtPY20dsdIrrc0nAVcpnDt
zWideMkJG+WsnnFlhFQBWCwMzMswRJJlqxy4shegZDSBgLLuYN+5SVNrRufChFYX
Ob9VS4xWM8lJAewZeH5GNqNokrE2wjhMrkKJ0RDr1f7RvmLN+Bpa6K3/UqtaVYAA
tw1hbhz8teU=
=e/pP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Return to August 1997
Return to ““William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@amaranth.com>”