Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com
Message-ID: <65CAA822B707D211AD430008C7F40FED748457@EXCHANGERSW2>
From: "McCunney, Dennis" <DMcCunney@roper.com>
To: "'DJ Delorie'" <dj@delorie.com>
Cc: "'cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com'" <cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com>
Subject: RE: cygwin vs. MKS Toolkit
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 18:38:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DJ Delorie [mailto:dj@delorie.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 6:29 PM
> To: DMcCunney@roper.com
> Cc: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com
> Subject: Re: cygwin vs. MKS Toolkit
> 
> > I doubt it, as the GNU liscense would likely forbid it,
> 
> If the GPL forbid MKS from doing it, it would forbid Cygnus from doing
> it too, and we do it all the time.  You just have to follow certain
> requirements when you use GPL'd code, but you aren't prevented from
> doing stuff with it.
> 
> Remember that the FSF owns the copyright on most of the core GNU
> programs.  All other vendors shipping GNU tools, from Redhat to Cygnus
> to (gasp if it happened) Microsoft would be equivalent as far as what
> they are allowed/required/forbidden to do.

Sure.  You resell packaged GNU code, but you make source available, and 
technically, I believe you aren't charging for the software itself - you're
charging for the packaging, polish, and support.  All legit.

My basic point was that I don't believe MKS is using GNU source, and they
have never, to my knowledge, offered any source for any of their products.
As I understand it, using GNU code would require them to do so.


______
Dennis

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com