Mail Archives: cygwin/1997/02/21/00:41:53
I have been trying to follow this thread since it started. There appear to be a
number of conflivcting views which are causing me concern as to my current use of
software under GPL and LGPL. Perhaps someone could help :-)
Currently I use g++ for the production of software used INTERNALLY to support our
development process. This software is never released to a customer and is not
sold. I dont publish it (the company would be upset if I did).
I think this is legal under GPL or LGPL.
I also use c++ for building embedded s/w with VXWORKS. This is shipped with a copy
of the gnu tools suite - gcc/c++/g++. There were some questions raised about the
legality of using g++ as it links in libg++ so I reverted to c++ which does not
have the same legal issues associated with it (allegedly). This s/w is sold
(although a customer never sees it and cannot do anything with it).
I believe this is also legal as everything is under GPL (and because VXWORKS said
it was)
My question is am I right?
On the position of the cygwin library and the associated costs. I am currently
using it but for "personal" development only. I am not going to be selling s/w
which uses it - so thats legal. IF I did decide to sell some s/w which used it then
I would need a license from cygwin at a cost which appears VERY high.
If thats right why would I ever bother with the cygwin library - I would just get
Microsoft (or some other suppliers) C++ system and build using that (I know its not
POSIX etc. but this is new s/w). This allows me to ship (on Windoze) as many copies
as I wish for as much as the market would take - no license fee to Microsoft.
Is this right or am I missing something fundemental?
Thanks for any clarification.
Kevin
-
For help on using this list, send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".
- Raw text -