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
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3E2D8043936AD611AF7D00508B5E9F4B45E4BE@server3.mobilecom.com>
From:	Cary Lewis <clewis AT mobilecom DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	RE: cygwin license with windows apps?
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2003 12:18:41 -0400
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	20 Jun 2003 16:29:09.0644 (UTC) FILETIME=[1389BCC0:01C33749]

Some more questions:

Why is it that linking to the cygwin.dll makes a program covered by GPL?

On Linux systems, does linking to the open source 'C' libraries, etc. cause
a program to be covered by the GPL?

If that were true, then wouldn't every program be GPL? Then you couldn't
have any Programs that didn't require publishing of source code? But there
are many, many commercial programs for Linux that don't publish their code.

For what it's worth, I would like to very much like to continue using
Cygwin, I think that there is a lot of power in it. I simply want to do the
right thing in terms of the licensing and additionally respect the
constraints that I have in terms of other stake holders and whether I can
publish my source.

I have trouble believing that there are systems out there that use cygwin in
a commercial fashion that have not purchased the breakout license.

Thanks for all of your advice and for your patience.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -