Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:47:42 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Distribution Message-ID: <20011221164742.GK13470@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E3E9 AT IIS000> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E3E9@IIS000> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 02:38:57PM +0100, Bernard Dautrevaux wrote: >>If you are in compliance with the licensing of each of the packages >>that you will be releasing (including the cygwin DLL) then you should >>be ok. I can only speak in a semi-official capacity for cygwin. The >>other packages have their own licensing terms. I assume that adhering >>to the GPL should satisfy all of the licensing terms but I don't know >>for sure. >> >>If you want to be 100% sure of that fact, then you should contact a >>lawyer. > > >Note that if you put full sources with the binaries, you provide your >user with everything that RedHat provides with the binary; so either >you are compliant or RedHat is not :-) > >Just my .02euro Your .02euro is worth exactly as much as mine. Neither of us is a lawyer. If someone is asking for advice on how to be legally correct then they should seek appropriate counsel. cgf -- 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/