X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:53:23 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Questions about porting from Linux to Windows...
Message-ID: <20070122165323.GY27843@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <45B4C19C DOT 80603 AT aol DOT com> <BAY106-F25038169F02163E00C6E6CCBAE0 AT phx DOT gbl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F25038169F02163E00C6E6CCBAE0@phx.gbl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
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

On Jan 22 16:21, jano trouba wrote:
> >From: Tim Prince <n8tm AT aol DOT com>



This is a NO-NO on this list.

http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR




> >You are going way beyond the scope of this list.  A mingw .a library could 
> >be linked into an MSVC build, since it tries to avoid conflicting run-time 
> >library dependencies.  Whether all those builders accept it with the 
> >different name, or allow you to rename it, is up to you.
> >It would be worth while to read the FAQ mentioned at the bottom of the 
> >mail.  Consider also the licensing implications, which you appear to want 
> >to ignore.
> >
> 
> Hey !! You have not read correctly...
> 
> As I said right at the start of the post, I AM concerned about the 
> licensing implications, but I could not succeed in posting my questions to 
> the licensing mail list... which are basically : does using cygwin just to 
> compile some static  .a  to be used elsewhere prompts a fee ?

If you create static libs which don't use Cygwin functions, then you're
build native Windows libs.  That's no problem and has nothing to do with
Cygwin anymore.  You're off the hook.

If you build static libs which use Cygwin functions, your application
will be invariably linked against the Cygwin DLL.  If you do this, your
application has to be either OSS software, or you have to purchase the
Cygwin buyout license, which is the only way to allow your application
stay proprietary.  For more details see the licensing web page
http://cygwin.com/licensing.html.  If you need more information about
the Cygwin buyout license, contact Red Hat as described on that web page.

To your question b), the answer is "yes".  You could also just require
a Cygwin net distro installation on the client machines.

I don't understand question c) at all.

> As for the technical part, I read the FAQ's and I could not find an answer 
> about the sockets ...

If you build your libs using Cygwin socket functions, you should use
them as on every POSIX system.  Especially asynchronous sockets are
rather outdated and should not be used anymore.

If you don't link against Cygwin socket functions but against native
WinSock socket functions, you're using Windows semantics.

"When in Sparta, do as the Spartans do" ;)

Question e) is not a Cygwin question so you should ask it on a mailing
list dedicated to native Windows development, or search Microsoft's
documentation:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/


HTH,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
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/