Subject: RE: cygwin and Postgres
From: Jason Zions <[email-masked]>
To: "'Peter Mount'" <[email-masked]>, "'Christopher Faylor'" <[email-masked]>, "Peimer, Hylton" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 14:28:23 -0700

> Are you sure about this?

Yes, he's sure about this.

> Using GPLed software to compile a commercial product doesn't 
> imply that
> the final product needs to be under the GPL. Infact the new 
> versions of
> the GPL & LGPL have new clauses to try to get round this confusion.

It's not just a matter of using GPL'd software to build the commercial
product. The cygwin runtime support code is GPL'd. Software which uses that
code at run-time must also be GPL'd. This is the principal difference
between the LGPL and the GPL. Suppose the runtime is a shared library. If
it's covered by the GPL, a user of that library is "infected" with the GPL
as well. If it's covered instead by the LGPL, the user of the library is
*not* infected.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to [email-masked]