Hi > On 26 Oct 15, at 04:47, Roman Kuksin <roman.kuk...@atapy.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > I am currently building AOO sources with CygWin under Windows XP x86 using > this instruction: > https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Windows_7 > > According to the link below I must distribute executables under the terms of > GPL3+ if the Cygwin DLL is linked: > https://cygwin.com/licensing.html > > Is it the case? > Is the Cygwin DLL linked when building AOO? > Is it legal to distribute the AOO executables under the Apache license when > CygWin is used?
I don't think that is the case. See Red Hat's statement on that Cygwin page: "As a special exception to GPLv3+, Red Hat grants you permission to link software whose sources are distributed under a license that satisfies the Open Source Definition with libcygwin.a, without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by GPLv3+." OO is licensed using Apache SL2. I haven't checked very recently, but that likely satisfies the OSI open source definition. Historically, usage of Cygwin, which has been extensive, and long (I've been advocating it and helping people with it since 2001, at least, and that includes some OO work) has not caused license panic. Red Hat seems intent on ensuring that calm prevails and that people use it freely and regularly without having that heart stopping moment of regret that would turn them to something else. But, I could be wrong here. About everything. Cheers, Louis > Regards, > Roman. > > P.S.: > I also posted this question here: > https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=79966 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
