Mark Hindess wrote: > I agree with Geir. For now, it would be safer to put it back in svn > and not download it.
Hmm, I don't get it -- why would it be ok for Apache to make it available independently via SVN? Regards, Tim > Tim, if you back this out, can you leave the macrodef and other > changes in place in make/depends.xml? > > Regards, > Mark. > > On 3/31/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I have no worries that we can re-distribute. It would be insane if we >> couldn't. >> >> But I don't want to be setting up and distributing software - our build >> system - that is a mechanism for contributory infringement of >> Microsoft's license agreement by automatically pulling down the .dll >> from a source that is in violation of that license. >> >> geir >> >> Paulex Yang wrote: >>> Well, so I have another question, if our concern is just whether the >>> msvcr71.dll can be redistributable _independently_, why we need to >>> download it rather than distributing it with Harmony? >>> >>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >>>> >>>> Tim Ellison wrote: >>>>> The Microsoft VisualStudio redist.txt allows it to be redistributed, >>>>> >>>>> "The following list reflects all files available with Microsoft Visual >>>>> Studio for redistribution;... >>>>> ... >>>>> msvcr71.dll >>>>> ... >>>>> " >>>>> >>>>> and the MSDN website [1] says: >>>>> >>>>> "An application should use and redistribute msvcr71.dll, and it should >>>>> avoid placing a copy or using an existing copy of msvcr71.dll in the >>>>> system directory. Instead, the application should keep a copy of >>>>> msvcr71.dll in its application directory with the program executable." >>>>> >>>>> So is the question, can _anyone_ (i.e. "dlldump.com") redistribute this >>>>> file? >>>> Or to make the question more precise, can anyone redistribute this >>>> file _independent_ of the application? That's my concern. >>>> >>>> geir >>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vclib/html/_crt_c_run.2d.time_libraries.asp >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> Paulex Yang wrote: >>>>>> I'm not a lawyer, but as to my knowledge, many commercial as well as >>>>>> open source software distribution includes msvcr71.dll, say, wincvs, >>>>>> ImageMagick, VMWare, OpenOffice, etc(just a few cases). >>>>>> >>>>>> And the vctoolkit2003's EULA says: >>>>>> "2.2 Redistributable Code-General. Microsoft grants you a nonexclusive, >>>>>> royalty-free right to reproduce and distribute the object code form of >>>>>> any portion of the Software listed in REDIST.TXT ("Redistributable >>>>>> Code"). For general redistribution requirements for Redistributable >>>>>> Code, see Section3.1, below. " >>>>>> >>>>>> but its redist.txt doesn't list any files! it says: >>>>>> >>>>>> "There are no redistributable files (i.e., dll's/cab's, etc.) included >>>>>> with the Visual C++ Toolkit 2003. Object library files included with >>>>>> the >>>>>> Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 (e.g. the C Runtime Library static libraries >>>>>> designated with the suffix ".lib") will be automatically linked to your >>>>>> program when they are compiled by the Visual C++ compiler and linker. >>>>>> Inclusion of these static libraries as compiled into your program is >>>>>> acceptable; you may not, however, redistribute the static libraries >>>>>> standalone - on their own." >>>>>> >>>>>> While MSDN also said files in redist.txt is redistributable, the >>>>>> VS.net's redist.txt DOES include msvcr71.dll. Does it mean only >>>>>> VisualStudio user can redistribute it? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vccore/html/vcconalistofredistributablefiles.asp >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >>>>>>> This gives me the heebie-jeebies. What is the license for that dll? >>>>>>> Are people allowed to re-distribute independent of an app that uses >>>>>>> it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where else can people get it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tim Ellison wrote: >>>>>>>> Ok, if somebody prefers a different source send a note. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mark Hindess wrote: >>>>>>>>> I failed to find it on microsoft.com too. Though I'd be happy to be >>>>>>>>> corrected. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was the first hit on the google search I did - or the first that >>>>>>>>> didn't use javascript and popups to serve the download. It's trivial >>>>>>>>> to change if you find a better source. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I was careful to make sure the file it served had the md5sum of the >>>>>>>>> file in svn. I also checked the sha1sum just to be a little more >>>>>>>>> confident of its validity. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>> -Mark. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 3/30/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Is "www.dlldump.com" our chosen supplier? I've never heard of them. >>>>>>>>>> I browsed around and didn't see it anywhere on the microsoft.com >>>>>>>>>> website. I know we are checking the MD5 to ensure we get the right >>>>>>>>>> thing; any idea about reliability etc. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mark Hindess (JIRA) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> download msvcr71.dll rather than distributing it >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Key: HARMONY-282 >>>>>>>>>>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-282 >>>>>>>>>>> Project: Harmony >>>>>>>>>>> Type: Improvement >>>>>>>>>>> Components: Classlib >>>>>>>>>>> Reporter: Mark Hindess >>>>>>>>>>> Priority: Trivial >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Tim suggested we should download the msvcr71.dll rather than >>>>>>>>>>> distributing it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >>>>>>>>>> IBM Java technology centre, UK. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>>>> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK. >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > -- > Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > IBM Java Technology Centre, UK. -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
