Re: Debug of Test 15 (cgf input needed)

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 09:07:38AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Suhaib Siddiqi [mailto:ssiddiqi@inspirepharm.com]
>> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 8:46 AM
>> Cc: 'cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com '
>> Subject: RE: Debug of Test 15 (cgf input needed)
>> 
>>XFree sources are not GPL'ed but are available from Cygwin/XFree86 FTP
>>server.  Read the URL please how to download sources.  There is no
>>setup.exe at present.  The binaries are under GPL because they link to
>>Cygwin1.dll,
>
>The binaries are not under the GPL.  If they were, the source would be
>under GPL as well.  Redhat grants an exception for software that is
>under a open source licence such as XFree86 so that they do not need to
>be GPL'd.

What's this?  Someone has actually read the Cygwin license agreement?

>>therefore sources are available, but sources itself are under X
>>COnsortium license, that means you do whatever you can, if you can
>>compile it without linking to Cygwin1.dll, then your binaries are under
>>X Consortium License too.
>
>If your source is under the X licence, you can link to cygwin1.dll
>withouth being infected.  (or at least this is what I understand from
>Corinna's comments last week).

This is basically true.  I went to great effort to modify the Cygwin
license a couple of years ago during one of the great GPL flame wars.
DJ and I came up with additional wording that I thought would satisfy
anyone except someone who didn't want to provide the sources.  I got
clearance from Cygnus's CEO to allow the greater flexibility.  I thought
I was doing the community a favor by relaxing the Cygwin license.

I guess it is not as much of a favor as I thought if we are still
wrangling about this two years later.

cgf