This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Help! Need B.20.1 src
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