Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:04:55 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: "'Earnie Boyd'" Subject: Re: cygwin with sockscap32 Message-ID: <20010222130455.P11175@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: 'Earnie Boyd' References: <878B7E94C206D511895800A0C9F4871CD5BB19@xcup01.cup.hp.com> <3A954C6E.FF247549@ece.gatech.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <3A954C6E.FF247549@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:29:18PM -0500 On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:29:18PM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote: >"MADHU,SURESH (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" wrote: >> >> I think its a cygnus issue. Because the sockscap code has not changed, but >> the cygwin code has - and the sockscap source code is not as open source as >> the cygnus code, > >Yes. It is and must be -- but perhaps the sockscap owners don't >understand that. By linking to the cygwin1.dll, the sockscap code is >required to be open source. If you cannot obtain the source from them, >then it is because the owners are VIOLATING cygwin's license. > >They MUST release the code -- if they don't, I'm sure Red Hat's lawyers >would love to talk with them. Yup. Also the fact that something "worked" before and "doesn't work" after upgrading cygwin does *not* automatically mean that "it's a cygwin problem". cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple