> >Red Hat might not have to buy a code signing cert for this. They might > >already have one that will work: http://goo.gl/5Hm3C > > The Cygwin project is not Red Hat. It wouldn't be "Red Hat" buying anything.
What is the Cygwin project then? I honestly thought it was a Red Hat project... I.e. I've thought of it as a "Linux" distribution from Red Hat, with Corinna Vinschen being a senior Red Hat engineer, according to your FAQ. Wikipedia says that you yourself used to work for Red Hat. Bottom of Cygwin.com: "The Cygwin DLL and utilities are Copyright C <snip> 2012 Red Hat, Inc. Other packages have other copyrights." Also Wikipedia says that the project was started by Cygnus Solutions which was then merged with Red Hat back in 2000. It is logical to assume that if the copyright is owned by Red Hat and some contributor(s) are Red Hat employees, then the Cygwin project would have some level of access to Red Hat resources. If Cygwin isn't owned/run by Red Hat as you seem to indicate, why do they seem to have their fingers in everything? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
