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/
