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: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:24:11 -0400 Message-Id: <200104091824.OAA01578@envy.delorie.com> X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj@envy.delorie.com using -f From: DJ Delorie To: raldi@research.netsol.com CC: cygwin@cygwin.com In-reply-to: <20010409122711.F24963@research.netsol.com> (message from Mike Schiraldi on Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:27:11 -0400) Subject: Re: Licensing References: <20010409103454.C24963@research.netsol.com> <200104091610.MAA00456@envy.delorie.com> <20010409122711.F24963@research.netsol.com> > Actually, we're not making any changes to either OpenLDAP or > Cygwin. We just want to link the two into the same executable. I assume, then, that OpenLDAP builds under cygwin "out of the box". > As far as i can tell from some amateur legal research, because the > OpenLDAP license is not GPL-compatible, it would not be legal to do > this without your special clause. Right. But, you are still required to follow the OSD when distributing your binary, even though the OpenLDAP license doesn't require it. > So i just wanted to make sure that using OpenLDAP in this way > qualifies for the clause. Sounds like it. Of course, if you link other things in also, the situation changes. I think the fact that the OpenLDAP license is listed under "GPL-incompatible, Free Software Licenses" implies that the exception applies. If it fell into the "Non-Free Software Licenses" section, the exception probably wouldn't apply. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple