Subject: RE: Licensing terms
From: "Clark, Matthew C (FL51)" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Corinna Vinschen'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 10:37:07 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 9:17 AM
> To: Clark, Matthew C (FL51)
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Licensing terms
> 
> Basically you'll have to release the sources of applications linked
> against Cygwin. Except when
> 
> - you never release the application since you're using it only
>   internally in your office or so. That's the trivial case.
> 
> - you purchase a special Cygwin license from Red Hat. For a
>   one time fee per project you may distribute also proprietary
>   software linked against Cygwin.
>   Visit http://www.redhat.com/products/support/cygwin/ for more
>   information.

Ok, thanks for the info.  Now for the follow-up.  Say I build a 
archive library, my_lib.a, based entirely on my own source code
and does NOT link in a GPL library, eg libcygwin.a, though it
does #include standard templates.

ie, gcc -c biff.c ; gcc -c bob.c ; ar -o my_lib.a biff.o bob.o  

First, does my_lib.a fall under GPL? 

If not, if I distribute my_lib.a binary and a user then uses it to 
build an executable under cygwin, where do the "open source" 
boundaries lie?

Matt Clark
[email-masked]

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/