Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT syncretize DOT net>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: shm status
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 12:31:57 +1000
Message-ID: <004901c21026$fe360530$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
In-reply-to: <20020610022747.GA13694@redhat.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000



> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com 
> [mailto:cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of 
> Christopher Faylor
> Sent: Monday, 10 June 2002 12:28 PM

> >However, that doesn't stop you from compiling them, linking 
> them against 
> >cygserver, and using them to help test and develop cygserver...
> 
> In reality, there is no reason why we couldn't include cygipc 
> in the cygwin
> release.  I was just concerned that the inclusion of cygipc 
> would hinder the
> development of a true cygwin DLL solution that used some of 
> the principles
> embodied in Robert/Egor's cygserver.

Yes, and we all agreed with that! I don't recall GPL issues ever being
raised against the inclusion of the cygipc _package_.

Furthermore, with the federated setup.ini capability, there's no reason
that someone 'out there' can't make cygipc available as a package if
they want to. I still don't think that cygipc belongs in the main distro
however. Oops, getting offtopic, perhaps this should go to cygwin-apps?

Rob