Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:15:11 -0500 (EST)
From:	Stephen L Moshier <moshier AT mediaone DOT net>
X-Sender:	moshier AT moshier DOT ne DOT mediaone DOT net
Reply-To:	moshier AT mediaone DOT net
To:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
cc:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, "John C. Bowman" <bowman AT math DOT ualberta DOT ca>
Subject:	Re: long double support in cygwin
In-Reply-To:	<20001112135708.A29567@redhat.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.20.0011121552060.2696-100000@moshier.ne.mediaone.net>
MIME-Version:	1.0

>  we have to own what goes into newlib/cygwin or the
> licenses of the source has to allow distribution of binaries without
> source code so that cygwin1.dll is encumbered.

In Bowman's case the library *is* source code, since the whole thing
is a text header file.  I don't see how your legal question would
apply to inline-math.h.

For my own part, I think that anyone can go to the internet and pick
up the original source code, so the question is not a vitally
important issue any more.  It does not bother me that people
distribute such library binaries without source code.  I probably
would not be inclined to assign free software to Red Hat, though,
because Red Hat is a commercial company.


> I again suggest that you take this discussion to the newlib mailing
> list.

OK, the inquiry has been redirected to newlib.


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

- Raw text -