Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID:	<31AA903A2A1FD111A06300805F4B6D640297930F@ssi2.interix.com>
From:	Jason Zions <jason_zions AT interix DOT com>
To:	"'Peter Mount'" <petermount AT it DOT maidstone DOT gov DOT uk>,
	"'Christopher Faylor'"
	<cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
	"Peimer, Hylton" <Hpeimer AT ndsisrael DOT com>
Cc:	"'cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com'" <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Subject:	RE: cygwin and Postgres
Date:	Tue, 22 Jun 1999 14:28:23 -0700
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8)

> Are you sure about this?

Yes, he's sure about this.

> Using GPLed software to compile a commercial product doesn't 
> imply that
> the final product needs to be under the GPL. Infact the new 
> versions of
> the GPL & LGPL have new clauses to try to get round this confusion.

It's not just a matter of using GPL'd software to build the commercial
product. The cygwin runtime support code is GPL'd. Software which uses that
code at run-time must also be GPL'd. This is the principal difference
between the LGPL and the GPL. Suppose the runtime is a shared library. If
it's covered by the GPL, a user of that library is "infected" with the GPL
as well. If it's covered instead by the LGPL, the user of the library is
*not* infected.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -