Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT syncretize DOT net>
To:	<cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	RE: shm status
Date:	Mon, 10 Jun 2002 12:31:57 +1000
Message-ID:	<004901c21026$fe360530$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
In-reply-to:	<20020610022747.GA13694@redhat.com>
Importance:	Normal
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com 
> [mailto:cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of 
> Christopher Faylor
> Sent: Monday, 10 June 2002 12:28 PM

> >However, that doesn't stop you from compiling them, linking 
> them against 
> >cygserver, and using them to help test and develop cygserver...
> 
> In reality, there is no reason why we couldn't include cygipc 
> in the cygwin
> release.  I was just concerned that the inclusion of cygipc 
> would hinder the
> development of a true cygwin DLL solution that used some of 
> the principles
> embodied in Robert/Egor's cygserver.

Yes, and we all agreed with that! I don't recall GPL issues ever being
raised against the inclusion of the cygipc _package_.

Furthermore, with the federated setup.ini capability, there's no reason
that someone 'out there' can't make cygipc available as a package if
they want to. I still don't think that cygipc belongs in the main distro
however. Oops, getting offtopic, perhaps this should go to cygwin-apps?

Rob

- Raw text -