Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:04:44 -0400
From: Jasmin Patry <jfpatry AT sunspirestudios DOT com>
To: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
Cc: robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au, cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: Re: distribution suggestion
Message-ID: <20001016210442.D23805@cgl.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <003201c03752$74404970$f7c723cb AT lifelesswks> <20001016141212 DOT A5544 AT cgl DOT uwaterloo DOT ca> <018201c037ba$6eb62750$f7c723cb AT lifelesswks> <200010162220 DOT SAA13845 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <200010162220.SAA13845@envy.delorie.com>; from dj@delorie.com on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 06:20:59PM -0400

On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 06:20:59PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> The solution is twofold:
> 
> 1. Modify src/winsup/cygwin/include/cygwin/version.h to not call
>    itself "cygwin1" (CYGWIN_VERSION_DLL_IDENTIFIER) in shared areas.
> 
> 2. Build a custom import library that wants a different dll name
>    (change DLL_NAME in Makefile.in).

Ok, thanks -- I'll try that if my renewed attempted with mingw32 don't
pan out.

> Note that you are still required to distribute the full source for the
> DLL, no matter what you call it.  Refering to the cygwin web site is
> *not* sufficient for the GPL's requirements.

While referring to the Cygwin website (which is what I currently do)
perhaps isn't in compliance with the letter of the GPL, I'd like to
think it's at least in compliance with the spirit.  In any case, Section
3(b) of the GPL states:

      3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
    under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
    Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
    [...]
        b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
        years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
        cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
        machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
        distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
        customarily used for software interchange; or,

Would this be sufficient?  (Note that I would argue that the web is "a
medium customarily used for software interchange", but if you guys
don't agree, then that's fine.)  I'd like to avoid forcing people to
download Cygwin source code if possible (since 99% of people downloading
Tux Racer it will have no use for it).

I'd very much like to bring Tux Racer in compliance with the GPL, if it
isn't already.  Tux Racer itself is distributed under the GPL, so it's
definitely not in my interest to violate it in any way.

Thanks for your help,
Jasmin

--
Jasmin Patry                               Lead Programmer, Tux Racer
jfpatry AT sunspirestudios DOT com                   http://www.tuxracer.com

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com