Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 21:21:25 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: How to create a ksh93 package...
Message-ID: <20020328022125.GA4292@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <00c301c1d5e8$038b6300$f20114d5 AT muffin> <20020328000656 DOT GC2331 AT redhat DOT com> <3CA25F67 DOT 80608 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3CA25F67.80608@ece.gatech.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 07:10:15PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> Do we really need to install other UNIX-like utilities?   That will be
>>  very confusing for users, I think.  Can't ksh just use the existing 
>utilties?
>
>Remember ksh has that in-process execution thing, where certain commands
>are replaced by internally loadable modules...the stuff Robert was
>talking about two weeks ago.

True, but there is no reason to call "ls.exe" by the same name in
another directory.  It could be called "ksh-ls.exe" or or ls.so or
something.

>>>Would it be OK to create a dummy -src package that just contains a text
>>>file (maye be with a suspicious name) which refers to the AT&T software
>>>download site?
>
>Absolutely not.  We must distribute the sources OURSELVES in order to
>comply with our own cygwin GPL license!

Cygwin doesn't really GPL infect anything.  If the source license that ksh93
is distributed with allows downloading from a web site, then that's fine,
so there is no reason to be GPL compliant.

What matters is if the source license is compliant under the exception
that Cygwin provides.

cgf