Andrew Schulman
Wed Sep 21 04:33:00 GMT 2011

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 01:20:10PM -0400, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> >> LGPLed code is fine.  It just can't be built into the Cygwin DLL.  So,
> >> if you're looking into packaging anything, I'd use the latest you can
> >> find.
> >> 
> >> Or, if you can find an implementation with a "better" license, I'll
> >> happily pull it into Cygwin itself.
> >
> >
> >
> >See gnu/argp* .  Looks like a complete implementation, all GPL.
> I guess I'm not being clear because I thought this was understood.  We
> can't pull GPLed stuff into the Cygwin DLL because Red Hat won't allow
> it.  We can pull in BSD licensed stuff and, in some cases, public domain
> stuff.  If above is GPLed then it is obviously not something that can
> be pulled into the DLL.

OK.  No, I didn't know about that, but then I'm not good at understanding
software licenses.  My otherwise reliable brain pretty much just skips
right over them.

No problem, I'll be glad to package libargp.  I'll see what the latest
versions are I can find that are GPL and LGPL, and pick the LGPL one if
it's not too old.

Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list