This is the mail archive of the firstname.lastname@example.org
mailing list for the Cygwin project. See the Cygwin
home page for more information.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Binary distributions of sourceware products
Bartlee Anderson writes:
> If we get back to what all started this, I think that if you make
> instructions on where
> to get cygwin and set it up. And instructions for getting and compiling
> whatever source you can't release under GPL to those who need to run them.
> Then you
> have given the end result desired (giving your executable by allowing it to
> be created)
> without having to distribute and therefore falling under the GPL. Simply
> enjoin the
> redistribution of created code. You can make it a directive to those to whom
> give the software, and explain that if they wish to redistribute, they can
> get an
> $8000 license from Cygnus. That should make it clear that they don't want to
> do that.
Everybody knows how to meet the Cygnus requirements the hard way. You
are describing the hard way. There is no arguement and frankly you
added nothing by stating the obvious. The real question is how can it
be made easy for people to provide binary distributions of the
hundreds of useful sourceware utilities as a compiling service. I
don't want to download the sources for inetd, less, man, cvs,
etc. etc. etc. Nice , helpful people are willing to do that for
us. How do we enable them to easily do so without walking all over the
Cygnus distribution terms.
Giving an executable by allowing it to be created is another name for
not giving the executable but giving source instead. You can't solve
the problem by renaming it.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to email@example.com