Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E3E9@IIS000>
From: Bernard Dautrevaux <Dautrevaux AT microprocess DOT com>
To: "'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com'" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc: mvine29 AT hotmail DOT com
Subject: RE: Distribution
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:38:57 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 4:21 AM
> To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
> Cc: mvine29 AT hotmail DOT com
> Subject: Re: Distribution
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 06:34:10PM +0100, Lapo Luchini wrote:
> >> In reality I really only need the cygwin and bash base 
> with devel and editor
> >> components (in order to teach C Language on win-tel 
> platforms), the others
> >> are simply gravy.  Thanks again for your assistance!
> >
> >I'm a profane of legal issues but I bet that as long as you 
> include full sources
> >and the url of cygwin's homepage theer's no problem, as it 
> is GPL software after
> >all.
> >
> >Correct me if I'm wrong...
> 
> You're wrong!  You don't need the URL.  :-)
> 
> But it would be appreciated.
> 
> What I was trying to find out was just how much reading of the license
> agreement was actually done.  You've clarified the subject for Michael
> but I was kinda hoping that if he was seriously thinking 
> about including
> the binaries that he'd seriously read the license agreement.
> 
> However, since none of us is actually a lawyer here, lately I 
> have been
> advising people that if they really want to be 100% sure of their
> distribution they should check with their own lawyer.  I get 
> asked a lot
> for what amounts to a lot of free legal advice and it has 
> occurred to me
> that I would rather not be seen as an official last word for anything.
> 
> If you are in compliance with the licensing of each of the 
> packages that
> you will be releasing (including the cygwin DLL) then you 
> should be ok.
> I can only speak in a semi-official capacity for cygwin.  The 
> other packages
> have their own licensing terms.  I assume that adhering to 
> the GPL should
> satisfy all of the licensing terms but I don't know for sure.
> 
> If you want to be 100% sure of that fact, then you should contact a
> lawyer.


Note that if you put full sources with the binaries, you provide your user
with everything that RedHat provides with the binary; so either you are
compliant or RedHat is not :-)

Just my .02euro

	Bernard

--------------------------------------------
Bernard Dautrevaux
Microprocess Ingenierie
97 bis, rue de Colombes
92400 COURBEVOIE
FRANCE
Tel:	+33 (0) 1 47 68 80 80
Fax:	+33 (0) 1 47 88 97 85
e-mail:	dautrevaux AT microprocess DOT com
		b DOT dautrevaux AT usa DOT net
-------------------------------------------- 

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/