Subject: GNU compilers, new Cygnus license wories.
From: [email-masked] (Jan-Jaap van der Heijden)

12 Jul 1997 08:39:58 -0700
Approved: [email-masked]
Distribution: cygnus
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: Jan-Jaap van der Heijden <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Original-To: Gordon Irlam <[email-masked]>
Original-cc: GNU-Win32 list <[email-masked]>,
        Peter Gerwinski <[email-masked]>
Original-Sender: [email-masked]

I am worried about the status of GNU compilers and my freedom to modify them
with the new, more restrictive Cygnus license [1].

It is allowed to use GCC, as part of the GNUPro toolkit, with cygwin.dll.
But, once I modify GCC, it is no longer part of the "GNUPro_Toolkit
produced by Cygnus Solutions", and I am not allowed to use it with
cygwin.dll. This effectively limits my freedom to modify GCC
and distribute modified copies. An example of such a modified GCC is
the "mingw32" project.

Since usage of cygwin.dll is limited to the GNUPro kit, will Cygnus keep
distributing free copies once the beta stage is finished, or do we have to
pay money then? In that case, I'd like to know now, before I invest any
more of my time.

GCC is distributed under the GPL [2]. From sec.6 of the GPL:

                            "You may not impose any further
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."

GNUPro is a work based on GCC, and the cygwin32 runtime license imposes a
restriction of my rights to modify GCC and distribute modified copies.

Now, in sec.7 of the GPL, I read:
                                                "If you cannot
distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you
may not distribute the Program at all.  For example, if a patent
license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by
all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then
the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to
refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."

Not only does the GPL forbid *me* to distribute a modified copy of a GPL-ed
program that's not completely free software, but (correct me if I'm wrong)
it also forbids Cygnus distributing GNUPro because of their own cygwin32
license.

Next. I want to be able to build the GNU Pascal [3] compiler based on cygwin32.
This fits the Cygnus description of a "Compiler_Suite" and sec.2 forbids me
to distribute it. For arguments' sake, let's assume the new Cygnus license
does not violate the GPL, so I could modify GCC and distribute modified
copies. GNU Pascal reuses the GCC's back-end, combined with a new Pascal
frontend. As such, it could be considered a (severely) modified GCC and
distribution would be legal. So, legal or not? -- I'm confused.

I think it would be unfair if C, C++ and ObjC users could use cygwin32,
while Pascal (and Fortran) programmers are denied, just because these
compilers are not part of Cygnus' GNUPro.

Futhermore, I think this project does not deserve the name "GNU-WIN32" if
it's not even GPL-ed, while disallowing true GNU software from using it.

I can understand Cygnus' worries about competitors in the field of
embedded systems, but this new license also affects people who work hard
to produce good, free software, which is what project GNU is all about.

Thank you,
J.J. van der Heijden

References:
[1] Cygnus license http://www.cygnus.com/gnu-win32/cygwin32-license-1.0.html
[2] GPL: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
[3] GNU Pascal: http://home.pages.de/~gnu-pascal/

-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".