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 sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 18:22:46 -0800 From: David Case To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cygwin and GPL (again) Message-ID: <20010214182246.E261136@gamow.scripps.edu> References: <3A8AEDAE DOT D92C0C26 AT datacomm DOT ch> <20010214162536 DOT E18567 AT redhat 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: <20010214162536.E18567@redhat.com>; from cgf@redhat.com on Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 04:25:36PM -0500 On Wed, Feb 14, 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > Btw, if you use Cygwin in an application, the application automatically > becomes free software. Just so you know. > Just so *I* know, isn't the above oversimplified? If I *distribute* an application linked to cygwin to others, I am obliged to follow GPL-like rules for the whole application. But simply *using* cygwin (e.g. to compile some code that expects a Unix environment) for my own use should not taint the code. Is this not correct? As a somewhat more realistic example, if I distribute source code under conditions other than the GPL, and suggest to users that they could use the cygwin package to compile my code on their Windows machine, would such a suggestion somehow make the source code free software? ...thanks for any clarification....dac -- ================================================================== David A. Case | e-mail: case AT scripps DOT edu Dept. of Molecular Biology, TPC15 | fax: +1-858-784-8896 The Scripps Research Institute | phone: +1-858-784-9768 10550 N. Torrey Pines Rd. | home page: La Jolla CA 92037 USA | http://www.scripps.edu/case ================================================================== -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple