Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Help! Need B.20.1 src
From: John Mellor <john AT mellor DOT dyndns DOT org>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <20050123150354.GC10176@cygbert.vinschen.de>
References: <1106432621 DOT 23759 DOT 6 DOT camel AT mellor DOT kw DOT net> <20050122234445 DOT GI32005 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <1106442000 DOT 24143 DOT 20 DOT camel AT mellor DOT kw DOT net> <41F2FB38 DOT BD37B3FB AT dessent DOT net> <20050123012249 DOT GN32005 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <1106490525 DOT 32550 DOT 9 DOT camel AT mellor DOT kw DOT net> <20050123150354 DOT GC10176 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 23:51:17 -0500
Message-Id: <1106801478.5890.13.camel@mellor.kw.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sun, 2005-23-01 at 16:03 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 23 09:28, John Mellor wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-22-01 at 20:22 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 05:17:44PM -0800, Brian Dessent wrote:
> > > >I don't know if the ancient Bxx series was LGPL, but the current Cygwin
> > > >source is GPL which means you must provide not only the Cygwin DLL
> > > >source but also all the source of your app that links to it.
> > > >
> > > >There is a mailing list to discuss this: cygwin-licensing at cygwin dot
> > > >com.
> > > 
> > > I think that cygwin has been GPL since early 1997.
> > > 
> > > So, you're right.  I can't believe I missed this.  Anything that uses the
> > > Cygwin DLL is GPLed.
> > 
> > In fact, I cannot ship the source for the app if I wanted to, as that
> > would then publish some of the Customer's proprietary trade secrets.
> 
> If you linked your application against the Cygwin DLL, then this
> application *is* GPL'd.  Full stop up to this point.  You don't
> have to publish the sources to the world, but you have to publish
> your sources to your customer.  Your customer has the right to
> get the source code of your application and the Cygwin DLL.  If
> you didn't do this so far, you're violating the license.
> 
> > However, if I read the specific version of the GPL that is being used
> > for cygwin correctly, then it says:
> > 
> > > In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat permits programs
> > > whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the
> > > Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a/cygwin1.dll
> > > without libcygwin.a/cygwin1.dll itself causing the resulting program
> > > to be covered by the GNU GPL.
> > > [...]
> > 
> > I believe that my app meets this criteria, and this then prevents me
> > from being between a rock and a hard place    ;^)
> 
> I don't see how that applies to your application.  The above paragraph
> only mentions that open source applications are excempted from that rule,
> not proprietary software as yours.
> 
> You have two choices:
> 
> - Comply with the GPL in one way or the other, which always means your
>   application is also GPLed and you have to open the source code to
>   your customer.
> 
> - Or, you ask Red Hat for a special Cygwin License according to this
>   paragraph on http://cygwin.com/licensing.html:
> 
>     Red Hat sells a special Cygwin License for customers who are unable
>     to provide their application in open source code form. For more
>     information, please see: http://www.redhat.com/software/cygwin/,
>     or call +1-866-2REDHAT ext. 45300 (toll-free in the US)

Thanks for the clarification.  Yes, I read that incorrectly.

I have no problem passing on the full source code to the Customer (after
all, that's what they paid me to work on), but I can't pass it on to
other parties as it contains some code fragments that implement their
trade secrets, and doing so would violate the trade secrecy laws.

So, am I safe if I give the Customer the source for an app that is
linked against cygwin1.dll, but not also publish it to the whole world?



--
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/