License for clang patch "7.0.1-cygwin-driver.patch"

quot;same as upstream code unless otherwise specified" policy would only really help W.R.T. Achim Gratz's update of the patch from clang 8.x to clang 9.x. The current licensing policy for LLVM is described at: <https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright-license-and-patents>

Re: Aspen license

>I'm trying to access at Aspen Plus using my correct and established license= > but since yesterday it's present a problem. >I receive this particular message: > "WARNING: Couldn't compute FAST_CWD pointer. Please report this problem t= >o the public mailing l

Aspen license

I'm trying to access at Aspen Plus using my correct and established license but since yesterday it's present a problem. I receive this particular message: "WARNING: Couldn't compute FAST_CWD pointer. Please report this problem to the public mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com

License compliance when shipping cygwin binaries

Hi List, I would like to bundle and ship an executable found in Cygwin and the DLLs it requires. The files in question are: chgrp.exe cyggcc_s-1.dll cygiconv-2.dll cygintl-8.dll cygwin1.dll For which of these files do I have to ship the source code to comply with the license, and what'

RE: License question (Distribution of cygwin1.dll

patrick schmidt sent the following at Monday, May 07, 2018 10:28 AM > >I want to use iPerf3.exe in an commercial projekt. iPerf uses the MIT >License but needs cygwin1.dll in order to function correctly. > >I need to distribute iperf3.exe in our commercial software, but we cant >

License question (Distribution of cygwin1.dll

Hello dear Cygwin community, I want to use iPerf3.exe in an commercial projekt. iPerf uses the MIT License but needs cygwin1.dll in order to function correctly. I need to distribute iperf3.exe in our commercial software, but we cant release the source code of this product. We do not modify

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: licensecheck 2.15.8-1 -- simple license checker for source files

PACKAGE DESCRIPTION === Homepage: Utility collection project http://packages.debian.org/devscripts License : GPL Attempt to determine the license that applies to each file passed to it, by searching the start of the file for text belonging to various licenses. If any of the

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: licensecheck 2.15.1-1 -- simple license checker for source files

PACKAGE DESCRIPTION === Homepage: Utility collection project http://packages.debian.org/devscripts License : GPL Attempt to determine the license that applies to each file passed to it, by searching the start of the file for text belonging to various licenses. If any of the

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: licensecheck 2.14.6-1 -- simple license checker for source files

PACKAGE DESCRIPTION === Homepage: Utility collection project http://packages.debian.org/devscripts License : GPL Attempt to determine the license that applies to each file passed to it, by searching the start of the file for text belonging to various licenses. If any of the

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: licensecheck 2.12.6-1 -- simple license checker for source files

PACKAGE DESCRIPTION === Homepage: Utility collection project http://packages.debian.org/devscripts License : GPL Attempt to determine the license that applies to each file passed to it, by searching the start of the file for text belonging to various licenses. If any of the

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: licensecheck 2.12.2-1 -- simple license checker for source files

PACKAGE DESCRIPTION === Homepage: Utility collection project http://packages.debian.org/devscripts License : GPL Attempt to determine the license that applies to each file passed to it, by searching the start of the file for text belonging to various licenses. If any of the

[ANNOUNCEMENT] New package: licensecheck 2.11.3-1 -- simple license checker for source files

PACKAGE DESCRIPTION === Homepage: Utility collection project http://packages.debian.org/devscripts License : GPL Attempt to determine the license that applies to each file passed to it, by searching the start of the file for text belonging to various licenses. If any of the

Re: Contributing license information?

Christopher Faylor wrote: On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 04:27:17PM +1100, Luke Kendall wrote: Those are further reasons I think it's more elegant to add the license info to the setup.ini file. But is the setup.ini creation currently automated? If so there will be some occasions wher

Re: Contributing license information?

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 04:27:17PM +1100, Luke Kendall wrote: >Those are further reasons I think it's more elegant to add the license >info to the setup.ini file. But is the setup.ini creation currently >automated? If so there will be some occasions where the license i

Re: Contributing license information?

David Sastre wrote: On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 03:50:45PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Oct 25 12:00, Luke Kendall wrote: Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license file in every

Re: Contributing license information?

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 03:50:45PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Oct 25 12:00, Luke Kendall wrote: > > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > >On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: > > >>Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license > > >>fi

Re: base-files license?

On Oct 25 18:46, Luke Kendall wrote: > In the "base-files" package, what license applies to the small > number of *actual shell scripts and skeleton files* under > etc/{defaults,postinstall, preremove}? > > Is it, perhaps, one of the common licenses that are collected

Re: Contributing license information?

On Oct 25 12:00, Luke Kendall wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: > >>Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license > >>file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for > >>people to f

base-files license?

In the "base-files" package, what license applies to the small number of *actual shell scripts and skeleton files* under etc/{defaults,postinstall, preremove}? Is it, perhaps, one of the common licenses that are collected together and stored in base-files? If so, which one? Rega

Re: Contributing license information?

Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for people to find the license information, if they need it. (Preparing this information has

Re: Contributing license information?

On Oct 21 18:41, David Sastre wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:59:01AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Oct 21 13:02, Luke Kendall wrote: > > > Can I ask a related question: for the few shell scripts and /etc > > > files provided in base-files: what l

Re: Contributing license information?

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:59:01AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Oct 21 13:02, Luke Kendall wrote: > > Can I ask a related question: for the few shell scripts and /etc > > files provided in base-files: what license are they under? The > > package contains lots of li

Re: Contributing license information?

On Oct 21 13:02, Luke Kendall wrote: > Can I ask a related question: for the few shell scripts and /etc > files provided in base-files: what license are they under? The > package contains lots of licenses, as we've been discussing, but I > couldn't find any indication of wh

Re: Contributing license information?

Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Oct 20 14:48, Luke Kendall wrote: Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for people to find the

Re: Contributing license information?

uke Kendall wrote: > > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > >On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: > > >>Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license > > >>file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for > > >>p

Re: Contributing license information?

On Oct 20 14:48, Luke Kendall wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: > >>Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license > >>file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for > >>people to f

Re: Contributing license information?

Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for people to find the license information, if they need it. (Preparing this information has

Re: Contributing license information?

Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for people to find the license information, if they need it. (Preparing this information has

Re: Contributing license information?

On Aug 19 11:09, Luke Kendall wrote: > Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license > file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for > people to find the license information, if they need it. > > (Preparing this information has required a

Contributing license information?

Soon, I will have prepared a list of the location of every license file in every Cygwin package. My motivation is to make it easy for people to find the license information, if they need it. (Preparing this information has required a lot of work on my part, so I would be happy if something

Re: License conflicts in Cygwin

On 02/24/2011 03:22 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > Disclaimer: IANAL. I can't speak for our legal dept, of course. There > won't be any changes in the Cygwin license any time soon as far as I'm > aware. If your lawyers feel that they have more questions about this, >

Re: License conflicts in Cygwin

On Feb 24 10:55, Denk, Uwe wrote: > Hello, > > we would like to use Cygwin. After checking the license conditions we > found two license conflicts in Cygwin, which is GPL v2 licensed in > accordance with the COPYING files of Cygwin: First of all, you're referring to an o

License conflicts in Cygwin

Hello, we would like to use Cygwin. After checking the license conditions we found two license conflicts in Cygwin, which is GPL v2 licensed in accordance with the COPYING files of Cygwin: 1) GPL v2 - GPL v3 incompatibility: (see http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses#GPLv3

Re: License violation: gpsd4win

On Jul 11 22:56, Yaakov S wrote: > http://code.google.com/p/gpsd-4-win/ > > This project provides an installer containing cygwin1.dll and at least a > Base installation. The project's SVN repo also contains the same > binaries. Nowhere are sources to Cygwin or any other package provided. Thank

License violation: gpsd4win

http://code.google.com/p/gpsd-4-win/ This project provides an installer containing cygwin1.dll and at least a Base installation. The project's SVN repo also contains the same binaries. Nowhere are sources to Cygwin or any other package provided. Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygw

Re: license violation

On Jun 12 22:49, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote: > I hope that it is appropriate to duplicate reports of license violations when > a lot o time has passed? (This was reported 4 years ago > <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2006-06/msg00335.html>.) No worries. &

license violation

I hope that it is appropriate to duplicate reports of license violations when a lot o time has passed? (This was reported 4 years ago <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2006-06/msg00335.html>.) These guys are distributing cygwin1.dll ver. 1.5 as part of the "free" (as in beer) p

Re: Generating and rendering Cygwin docs. Was" Re: [PATCH] avoid 404 link for propietary cygwin license in userguide

On Jan 5 13:22, Yaakov S wrote: > On 04/01/2010 23:05, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: > >Wouldn't hurt in my opinion. IIRC, the biggest issue in the past has > >been to get DocBook working under Cygwin, so Linux has been a > >requirement to get the documentation generated, as a result. But > >things m

Re: Generating and rendering Cygwin docs. Was" Re: [PATCH] avoid 404 link for propietary cygwin license in userguide

On 04/01/2010 23:05, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: Wouldn't hurt in my opinion. IIRC, the biggest issue in the past has been to get DocBook working under Cygwin, so Linux has been a requirement to get the documentation generated, as a result. But things may have changed here. I have a DocBook SGML

Re: Generating and rendering Cygwin docs. Was" Re: [PATCH] avoid 404 link for propietary cygwin license in userguide

On 01/04/2010 10:56 PM, Lee Rothstein wrote: Larry, et al, * I'm about to do a review of the Cygwin docs. I'd really like to do that from a single PDF file per doc (FAQs, User Guide, API Guide). How do I get from the SGML (or, XML, or Docbook) source files to a single PDF? > Or, if that's docu

Generating and rendering Cygwin docs. Was" Re: [PATCH] avoid 404 link for propietary cygwin license in userguide

Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: > On 01/04/2010 11:12 AM, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote: >> The following patch replaces a broken link in : >>http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/are-free.html >> with the closest URL I could find in Red Hat's website in reference to the >> proprietary cygwin lic

Re: [PATCH] avoid 404 link for propietary cygwin license in userguide

On 01/04/2010 11:12 AM, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote: The following patch replaces a broken link in : http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/are-free.html with the closest URL I could find in Red Hat's website in reference to the proprietary cygwin licensing terms. feel free to replace it with

[PATCH] avoid 404 link for propietary cygwin license in userguide

tion using the Cygwin library, you may want the Cygwin proprietary-use license. For more information about the proprietary-use license, please go to -http://www.redhat.com/software/tools/cygwin/";>http://www.redhat.com/software/tools/cygwin/. +http://www.redhat.com/services/cus

License violation? (was: CygTeXmacs starting error)

On 03/01/2010 05:48, Kalle Mikkola wrote: I unzipped CygTeXmacs to a directory Sounds strange, but the CygTeXmacs installation[1] includes an OLD cygwin1.dll (and an assortment of other packages), but the sources are not included in the download, I see no link thereto on the webpage, nor can

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 04:46:32PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote: >On 29/09/2009 10:18, Luke Kendall wrote: >> The URL http://cygwin.com/licensing.html (in summary) says that most >> Cygwin software is licensed under GNU GPL, X11 copyright (not sure how >> that's a license),

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

On 29/09/2009 10:18, Luke Kendall wrote: The URL http://cygwin.com/licensing.html (in summary) says that most Cygwin software is licensed under GNU GPL, X11 copyright (not sure how that's a license), and some are public domain. That should probably read "X11 license" rather than

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 08:32:06PM +1000, Luke Kendall wrote: >As an engineer, it seems inefficient if every company that wants to use >Cygwin first has to spend several days/weeks finding all the licenses >across 2000(?) packages, distilling the license files down into a set, >f

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 08:54:01PM +1000, Luke Kendall wrote: >I don't think you mean it is saying "you are not allowed to use Cygwin >within a company, Cygwin is only for personal or scientific >non-commercial research", and I'm happy that I can't see that. :-) Cygwin is basically GPL-based. H

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

Stephen Bennett wrote: Um, and assuming that we found a list of packages that had no licenses, and a list of packages with licenses that we can't accept, is there any way to supply setup with a pre-defined list of packages to include or exclude? Or would everyone installing Cygwin at our company

RE: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

> Um, and assuming that we found a list of packages that had no licenses, > and a list of packages with licenses that we can't accept, is there any > way to supply setup with a pre-defined list of packages to include or > exclude? Or would everyone installing Cygwin at our company have to > read t

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

legal and as such I stay away as much as possible. Fair enough! As for licenses with commercial exceptions, personally (IANAL, and I'm not speaking for Red Hat, nor for the Cygwin community at large, nor did I actually search for it) I think there is none in the distro, except for the

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

s isn't technical, this is legal and as such I stay away as much as possible. >> As for licenses with commercial exceptions, personally (IANAL, and I'm >> not speaking for Red Hat, nor for the Cygwin community at large, nor did >> I actually search for it) I think there i

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Sep 29 19:18, Luke Kendall wrote: The URL http://cygwin.com/licensing.html (in summary) says that most Cygwin software is licensed under GNU GPL, X11 copyright (not sure how that's a license), and some are public domain. I'm just wondering what's

Re: Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

On Sep 29 19:18, Luke Kendall wrote: > The URL http://cygwin.com/licensing.html (in summary) says that most > Cygwin software is licensed under GNU GPL, X11 copyright (not sure how > that's a license), and some are public domain. > > I'm just wondering what's the

Four license questions that affect commercial use of Cygwin

The URL http://cygwin.com/licensing.html (in summary) says that most Cygwin software is licensed under GNU GPL, X11 copyright (not sure how that's a license), and some are public domain. I'm just wondering what's the recommended way to check that use of Cygwin internally at a

Re: Nginx license violation?

On Mar 27 10:28, Christopher Faylor wrote: > This link came up on IRC: > > http://www.kevinworthington.com/nginx-for-windows/ > > It looks like a potential GPL violation. He's just referring to external sources and not even to the Cygwin site afaics. I'll follow up on this. Thanks, Corinna -

Nginx license violation?

This link came up on IRC: http://www.kevinworthington.com/nginx-for-windows/ It looks like a potential GPL violation. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html

Re: Fwd: [Clamav-devel] Bug#512776: License incompatibility with libgmp ("GPLv2 only" linking to "LGPLv3 or later")

David Billinghurst schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: Attached is a clamav license incompatibility bug with libgmp from the debian lawyers. clamav might be forced to link against an older libgmp. The switch to LGPL3 came with gmp-4.2.2, so gmp-4.2.1 would be needed for clamav compatibility. But

Re: Fwd: [Clamav-devel] Bug#512776: License incompatibility with libgmp ("GPLv2 only" linking to "LGPLv3 or later")

Reini Urban wrote: Attached is a clamav license incompatibility bug with libgmp from the debian lawyers. clamav might be forced to link against an older libgmp. The switch to LGPL3 came with gmp-4.2.2, so gmp-4.2.1 would be needed for clamav compatibility. But prev is gmp-4.2.3-1, so we

Fwd: [Clamav-devel] Bug#512776: License incompatibility with libgmp ("GPLv2 only" linking to "LGPLv3 or later")

Attached is a clamav license incompatibility bug with libgmp from the debian lawyers. clamav might be forced to link against an older libgmp. The switch to LGPL3 came with gmp-4.2.2, so gmp-4.2.1 would be needed for clamav compatibility. But prev is gmp-4.2.3-1, so we might need a new gmp

license vio

Just reporting a sourceforge project that's distributing the cygwin binary. See: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=22466&package_id=15678&release_id=27619 -- J. Lambert _ Dave vs. Carl: The Insignificant Champio

Re: It this a license violation?

Oops wrong list. Should be on cygwin-licensing at cygwin dot com More coffee for me! Colin Harrison -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ:

It this a license violation?

Hi, Spotted this on the web:- http://www.axiomsol.com/hedesu/kb/details.php?id=45 Does this comapany have a legit license? Colin Harrison -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http

Re: possible DLL license violations

Christopher Faylor wrote: > >>anyone else's. I only chime in because as best I understand it, once > >>having found a violator the rights holder must act to protect said > >>rights; failing to do so may be construed as similar to consent. > > > >That applies only to trademarks, not copyright or p

Re: possible DLL license violations

On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 06:59:36PM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote: >beau wrote: >>anyone else's. I only chime in because as best I understand it, once >>having found a violator the rights holder must act to protect said >>rights; failing to do so may be construed as similar to consent. > >That applies

Re: possible DLL license violations

beau wrote: > anyone else's. I only chime in because as best I understand it, once > having found a violator the rights holder must act to protect said > rights; failing to do so may be construed as similar to consent. That applies only to trademarks, not copyright or patents. Brian -- Unsubsc

Re: possible DLL license violations

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 4/23/05, Larry Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh, of course I'm obliged to say IANAL. Dunno that you're obliged to say it. ;) I-also-ANAL, but I am a student, which means my information is probably even shakier than anyone else's. I only chime

Re: possible DLL license violations

ygwin1.dll' that he's distributing. Also, as you noted, he is clearly linked against 'cygwin1.dll', even if he doesn't realize it. As for the statement about not being in violation because of the long history of 'shorten' and friends, I admire his sense of humor. ;-

Re: possible DLL license violations

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 10:56:53AM -0700, David Rothenberger wrote: >On 4/22/2005 8:52 AM, David Rothenberger wrote: >>I ran across a tool called "Trader's Little Helper" at [url removed >>because it trips the cygwin spam filter] that includes the >>cygwin1.dll, but doesn't provide source code. Eve

Re: possible DLL license violations

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 05:58:24PM -0700, David Rothenberger wrote: >On 4/22/2005 10:56 AM, David Rothenberger wrote: >>On 4/22/2005 8:52 AM, David Rothenberger wrote: >> >>>I ran across a tool called "Trader's Little Helper" at [url removed >>>because it trips the cygwin spam filter] that includes

Re: possible DLL license violations

On 4/22/2005 8:52 AM, David Rothenberger wrote: I ran across a tool called "Trader's Little Helper" at [url removed because it trips the cygwin spam filter] that includes the cygwin1.dll, but doesn't provide source code. Even worse, it puts cygwin1.dll in C:\WINDOWS! I succeeded in contacting the a

possible DLL license violations

I ran across a tool called "Trader's Little Helper" at http://thor.prohosting.com/roh0205/ that includes the cygwin1.dll, but doesn't provide source code. Even worse, it puts cygwin1.dll in C:\WINDOWS! I then did a search of my hard drive for other copies and was surprised to find a few more. T

Re: possible DLL license violations

On 4/22/2005 10:56 AM, David Rothenberger wrote: On 4/22/2005 8:52 AM, David Rothenberger wrote: I ran across a tool called "Trader's Little Helper" at [url removed because it trips the cygwin spam filter] that includes the cygwin1.dll, but doesn't provide source code. Even worse, it puts cygwin1.d

Re: License

Corinna wrote: If you distribute a Cygwin DLL binary, you must also provide the sources of the DLL. It's not enough to point to the Cygwin web page. For further details, see http://cygwin.com/licensing.html And also as I understand the GPL, you should together along with the source to the cygwin

Re: License

s no such "GNU zip" thing. There's only a GNU gzip thing. zip is infozip and has a much more liberal license than GPL. And there exist native win32 versions for that. The rest is correct, and it is very easy to provide just a link to cygwin setup.exe. -- Reini Urban http://xarch.t

Re: License

Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > IANAL, but the GPL does talk about linking as separate from invoking the > programs using fork/exec. In particular, the following two sections from > the GPL FAQ might be relevant: > and >

Re: License

aq.html#GPLAndPlugins> and <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLPluginsInNF>. As always, please consult a real lawyer when there's any doubt as to the interpretation of the terms of the license. Igor -- http://cs.

Re: License

On Aug 26 16:58, Giulio Ardoino wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > If you distribute a Cygwin DLL binary, you must also provide the sources > > of the DLL. It's not enough to point to the Cygwin web page. For further > > details, see http://cygwin.com/licensing.html > > Thanks a lot Corinna

Re: License

Corinna Vinschen wrote: > If you distribute a Cygwin DLL binary, you must also provide the sources > of the DLL. It's not enough to point to the Cygwin web page. For further > details, see http://cygwin.com/licensing.html Thanks a lot Corinna. This means I'm allowed to distribute cygwin dll as

Re: License

On Aug 26 16:25, Giulio Ardoino wrote: > Hello, > I have a question about cygwin license: > If I write a windows program that uses some tools contained in the > cygwin package (and therefore the dll itself), will I be able to > distribute my software with cygwin dll in it or do I

License

Hello, I have a question about cygwin license: If I write a windows program that uses some tools contained in the cygwin package (and therefore the dll itself), will I be able to distribute my software with cygwin dll in it or do I have to post a separate link where to download it? Thanks in

Re: License issue

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 12:53:23PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >I see. But I suppose, for an example described in > >http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-06/msg00678.html , providing a piece of > >paper with such an offer in the product box should count as fulfilment > >of clause 3b? > So, basic

Re: License issue

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 06:49:44PM +0300, Baurjan Ismagulov wrote: >On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:25:38AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> The reason this doesn't count is not because we have an arbitrary restriction >> on the license. It is because it is extremely unlikel

Re: License issue

Hello, Christopher! On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:25:38AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > The reason this doesn't count is not because we have an arbitrary restriction > on the license. It is because it is extremely unlikely that you are going > to send a postal mail offer to ev

Re: License issue

in under the 3b clause so that doesn't count >> here at all. > >This was my point. I couldn't find this on the web page; I'd like to see >it mentioned (please point me to the text if I overlooked it). The reason this doesn't count is not because we have an arbitra

Re: License issue

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 03:56:20PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > What this company can not do is, to rely on Red Hat > to keep sources for three years and then point their customers to the > Red Hat web page. If they do, they are infringing the licensing. I see your point, thanks much for the

Re: License issue

On Jun 16 16:38, Baurjan Ismagulov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 03:10:48PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > > We don't distribute Cygwin under the 3b clause so that doesn't count > > > > here at all. > > > This was my point. I couldn't find this on the web page; I'd like to see > > > it men

Re: License issue

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 03:10:48PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > We don't distribute Cygwin under the 3b clause so that doesn't count > > > here at all. > > This was my point. I couldn't find this on the web page; I'd like to see > > it mentioned (please point me to the text if I overlooked

Re: License issue

On Jun 16 15:59, Baurjan Ismagulov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 02:45:19PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > We don't distribute Cygwin under the 3b clause so that doesn't count > > here at all. > > This was my point. I couldn't find this on the web page; I'd like to see > it mentioned (pleas

Re: License issue

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 02:45:19PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > Huh? That's exactly section 3a, just take the "accompany" literally. Ok, thanks. > We don't distribute Cygwin under the 3b clause so that doesn't count > here at all. This was my point. I couldn't find this on the web page; I'

Re: License issue

On Jun 16 15:11, Baurjan Ismagulov wrote: > Hello, Corinna! > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 01:11:52PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > If you don't provide the sources on the same medium as the binaries, > > you're infringing the Cygwin license. > > I coul

Re: License issue

Hello, Corinna! On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 01:11:52PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > If you don't provide the sources on the same medium as the binaries, > you're infringing the Cygwin license. I couldn't find this information (about the same medium) on http://cygwin.com/

Re: License issue

site... > > For further information see: > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCDistributeWithSourceOnInternet > > And few headers downwards. That should answer to most of questions. That was an unnecessary extension. If you don't provide the sources on the same medium

Re: License issue

Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Jun 15 13:51, Avraham H. Fraenkel wrote: If I am writing a short C program, comply it with GCC, and put the exe and the cygwin dll in my site, should I add something? Yes, the sources of your application as well as the sources of the Cygwin DLL, according to the GPL. I

Re: License issue

On Jun 15 13:51, Avraham H. Fraenkel wrote: > If I am writing a short C program, comply it with GCC, and put the exe and the > cygwin dll in my site, should I add something? Yes, the sources of your application as well as the sources of the Cygwin DLL, according to the GPL. If you don't distribu

License issue

If I am writing a short C program, comply it with GCC, and put the exe and the cygwin dll in my site, should I add something? I do not change nothing in any dll, and distribute it as is. Thanks -- Avraham -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports:

Re: license for X-startup-scripts package

We have a mailing list for cygwin-x. Redirecting there. On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:02:23PM -0500, Dick Repasky wrote: >I'm looking for the license under which the X-startup-scripts package is >released. The file named COPYING is 1 byte long in >usr/X11R6/share/doc/X-startup

license for X-startup-scripts package

I'm looking for the license under which the X-startup-scripts package is released. The file named COPYING is 1 byte long in usr/X11R6/share/doc/X-startup-scripts-1.0.2/COPYING, and in the source tarball X-startup-scripts-1.0.2-1-src.tar.bz2:X-startup-scripts-1.0.2.tar.bz2:COPYING. I ha

Re: About cygwin license

On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 08:44:51AM +, Armo Super wrote: >Hello > >What do you think about next situation? > >I have made an software, that I'm going to sell. >My software uses PostgreSql database system, witch is >distributed under BSD license. >If I want to

Re: About Cygwin license

At 11:00 AM 12/11/2003, Corinna Vinschen you wrote: >On Dec 11 09:59, Larry Hall wrote: >> Also, as <http://cygwin.com/licensing.html> >> points out, it doesn't matter what license the software distributed with >> Cygwin is. If it uses cygwin1.dll, which *is*

  1   2   >