This is the mail archive of the cygwin-talk mailing list for the cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Windows 95 Support (was mis-subjected "RE: cygwin Perl 5x slower than ActiveState?" for some unknowable reason)


> From: Dave Korn
[snip]
> > Since we're getting all licencey today, allow me to point out 
> > something any one of us should have caught long ago: setup.exe as 
> > distributed on the Cygwin web site does not include a copy 
> of the GPL, 
> > which, while IANAL, I believe is a violation of the GPL.
> 
>   LicensOR is allowed to distribute licensOR's own 
> copyrighted software any damn way LicensOR wishes, since GPL 
> obligations apply to licensEE.  Guess RedHat has decided not 
> to sue itself gratuitously.
> 

So, since LicensOR is me (and several dozen other people, and Red Hat), none
of us have to obey either the spirit or letter of the GPL?  Or are we
supposed to sue ourselves round-robin style?  You've lost me Dave.  Perhaps
a quick grep through the source for copyright notices will clarify things.

Oh, and watch the potty mouth.

> > ("Source
> > code for setup.exe is available from 
> http://cygwin.com/setup/."; - no, 
> > it isn't, at least not for 2.510.2.2).
> 
>   Yes it is.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Index of /setup/current
> 
> Icon  Name                    Last modified      Size  
> Description[DIR] Parent
> Directory                             -   
> [   ] setup-2.510.2.2.exe     30-Nov-2005 21:42  299K  
> [   ] setup-2.510.2.2.tar.bz2 08-Sep-2005 16:14  656K  
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>   Guess what's in the tarball, Gary!

What tarball?  When I posted the message to which you refer, there was no
tarball there, as you are of course now all too aware.  Luckily, I was able
to bring this state of affairs to the attention of the proper authorities
and get it corrected before any LicensORs or LicensEEs were harmed.  Said it
before, say it again: measure twice, cut once.

>  Yes, you thought it was 
> just the executable,

No, I thought it wasn't there.  Which it wasn't.

> only zipped up to make it three times 
> bigger than the raw binary, but no!  It's the source!
> 

And now it's actually there, thanks to my sharp eye and Brian's mad ftp
skillz.  You're more than welcome Korns.  If there's anything more I can do
to help, just give me a shout.

> 
>     cheers,
>       DaveK
> --
> Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Indeed.

-- 
Gary R. Van Sickle
 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]