Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 17:25:21 -0400
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: License question about cygwin
Message-ID: <20030716212521.GE17135@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <2265699E79C5D51197940002B31B4EDB06C00B63 AT exchange DOT fdle DOT gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2265699E79C5D51197940002B31B4EDB06C00B63@exchange.fdle.gov>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
From: cgf AT redhat DOT com (Christopher Faylor)

On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 02:48:14PM -0400, Tillman, James wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Elfyn McBratney [mailto:elfyn AT emcb DOT co DOT uk]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:43 AM
>> To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>> Cc: Cary Lewis
>> Subject: Re: License question about Cygwin
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
>> 
>> > On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Cary Lewis wrote:
>> >
>> > > As the Cygwin.dll is licensed under GPL, any "Program" 
>> that links to it must
>> > > be released under GPL as well.
>> >
>> > Under section 10 of the GPL, if the "program" is OSD 
>> compatible then the
>> > "program" is not auto-GPL'd.
>> >
>> > > My question is, what if the "Program" also links to 
>> proprietary .dlls that
>> > > are authored by someone else. That source can not be 
>> published (I don't even
>> > > have access to it). Furthermore these .dlls are not 
>> freely available.
>> >
>> > Are these DLL's Cygwin DLL's ? i.e. not native Windows DLL's.
>> >
>> > > Does that mean that even if I publish all of my source 
>> code, I would still
>> > > be violating the GPL because I couldn't publish the 
>> source code to the
>> > > proprietary libraries.
>> >
>> > Yes.
>> 
>
>So how would the hypothetical "Program" you are discussing differ from
>Cygwin itself, which links to Win32 dlls that cannot be released as source
>code?

I highly recommend the GPL FAQ at:
http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

This particular question is answered here:
http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWritingFSWithNFLibs

In case it isn't really clear, GPL licensing issues have been discussed to
death all over the internet.  There is no reason to ask questions here.
You can do research on almost any question you need by using either the
FSF site or google.

For questions regarding Cygwin licensing, as I said elsewhere, your best
bet is to consult Red Hat and your own lawyer.

I would like to request that this discussion now cease.

If someone is having problems getting a response on cygwin licensing then
feel free to send me personal email.  I don't want to answer licensing
questions personally but I will put you in touch with internal people
at Red Hat.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/