Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 15:53:35 -0400 Message-Id: <200005021953.PAA22398@envy.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: nhv AT cape DOT com CC: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com In-reply-to: <000801bfb46c$bdd231c0$2137ba8c@nhv> Subject: Re: Things you can do with Cygwin References: <000801bfb46c$bdd231c0$2137ba8c AT nhv> > I would venture that legally you could link against a propriatary > DLL that you distributed separately ( and perhaps sold ) > and still use Cygwin for the rest of the application. This is a grey area. If your application ran properly without those proprietary dlls, and the API that is used to talk to those dlls is public, and other companies also produced dlls that could be used with your application, I'd probably agree that it's OK. If your application didn't work without those DLLs and there were no other DLLs or applications that used that interface, I'd say it was still one work, and the GPL would apply to both components. The user should be able to start from source, and rebuild the "whole thing", without having to rely on binary modules to get a functioning application. Remember, the GPL talks about "works", not programs. You have to know if you have created one work that happens to be composed of more than one file/program/whatever, or if you have really created two independent works that just happen to be able to be used together, but could be used separately. Two programs that talk over TCP/IP between two computers in different countries may still be only one work, depending on how co-dependent they are. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com