delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 03:26:51PM +0200, Steve Lhomme wrote: > It would be possible otherwise if it was LGPL. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html > > > I'm looking for a little clarification about the GPL that covers > > > cygwin, specifically the gcc compiler. I used to be under the > > > impression that if I modified something covered by the GPL (such as > > > a linux module, or a cygwin tool), then I'd have to make the changes > > > > > public. Now it seems that even if I just use/link a GPL'ed object, > > > such as libcygwin.a, I have to make any and all source code I might > > > have compiled under cygwin's gcc open source. Is this correct? > > > If so, is this specific to cygwin or GPL in general and when > > > did this happen? > > > > Basically you'll have to release the sources of applications linked > > against Cygwin. Except when > > > > - you never release the application since you're using it only > > internally in your office or so. That's the trivial case. > > > > - you purchase a special Cygwin license from Red Hat. For a > > one time fee per project you may distribute also proprietary > > software linked against Cygwin. > > Visit http://www.redhat.com/products/support/cygwin/ for more > > information. -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc. -- 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/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |