Win CE port
Hi, I believe that Classpath has been ported to Win CE, correct? What library did you use to achieve POSIX compatibility? What toolchain? Thanks, -- Philippe Laporte Software Gatespace Telematics Första Långgatan 18 41328 Göteborg Sweden Phone: +46 702 04 35 11 Fax: +46 31 24 16 50 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi Philippe, Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 18:56 +0100 schrieb Philippe Laporte: > Hi, > I believe that Classpath has been ported to Win CE, correct? No, that is not the case. The JamaicaVM (a Classpath-based commercial VM, http://www.aicas.com ) has a (somewhat experimental) port for WinCE. > What library did you use to achieve POSIX compatibility? What toolchain? We use the standard GNU toolchain. Cheers, Roman signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi Philippe, On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 18:56 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: > I believe that Classpath has been ported to Win CE, correct? Take a look at Mysaifu. It is a runtime that runs on Windows Mobile 2003 software for Pocket PC (Pocket PC 2003). Which, if I understood correctly is some variant of Windows CE. It is based on GNU Classpath and distributed under the GPL. http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/~dat/java/project/jvm/index_en.html Cheers, Mark signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi, You mean it's a simple gcc target? Thanks, Philippe Laporte Software Gatespace Telematics Första Långgatan 18 41328 Göteborg Sweden Phone: +46 702 04 35 11 Fax: +46 31 24 16 50 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Roman Kennke wrote: Hi Philippe, Am Donnerstag, den 19.01.2006, 18:56 +0100 schrieb Philippe Laporte: Hi, I believe that Classpath has been ported to Win CE, correct? No, that is not the case. The JamaicaVM (a Classpath-based commercial VM, http://www.aicas.com ) has a (somewhat experimental) port for WinCE. What library did you use to achieve POSIX compatibility? What toolchain? We use the standard GNU toolchain. Cheers, Roman ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi Phillipe, On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 15:03 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: > It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed > in a commercial product. There should be no trouble at all freely redistributing such a thing in a commercial product. Just make sure you distribute the source code for it to your users. See http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/selling.html And if you have more questions on the use of GPL covered products please feel free to contact [EMAIL PROTECTED], they even provide a complaince lab service for commercial entities. See http://www.fsf.org/licensing/compliancelab.html Cheers, Mark -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi, It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed in a commercial product. We therefore have stopped looking after seeing a satisfactory LGPL VM. Other insights? Thanks a lot, Philippe Laporte Software Gatespace Telematics Första Långgatan 18 41328 Göteborg Sweden Phone: +46 702 04 35 11 Fax: +46 31 24 16 50 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi Philippe, On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 18:56 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: I believe that Classpath has been ported to Win CE, correct? Take a look at Mysaifu. It is a runtime that runs on Windows Mobile 2003 software for Pocket PC (Pocket PC 2003). Which, if I understood correctly is some variant of Windows CE. It is based on GNU Classpath and distributed under the GPL. http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/~dat/java/project/jvm/index_en.html Cheers, Mark ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi Phillipe,
On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 15:03 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote:
It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed
in a commercial product.
There should be no trouble at all freely redistributing such a thing in
a commercial product. Just make sure you distribute the source code for
it to your users.
Just to clarify:
Depends what you mean by "it". If you mean the VM, that may not be
enough, since in an embedded environment it is likely the VM is linked
in with the commercial product. In that case you may also have to
freely redistributing source for the commercial product. (Of course
we know that Free ("open-source") Software is not incompatible with
it being commercial (i.e. for-profit) - but it is incompatible with
it being proprietary ("closed-source").)
--
--Per Bothner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://per.bothner.com/
___
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Philippe Laporte wrote: Hi, It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed in a commercial product. You can use and redistribute a GPLd VM, just like how you can use or redistribute GNU/Linux in products. You need to comply with the provisions of the GPL for the code you license from third parties under the GPL, of course, be it a VM or the Linux kernel, but that part is the same for any code under any license. If you have questions and doubts regarding the precise legal effects of the GPL in your situation, a wise choice is to ask a lawyer familar with the GPL, like FSF's GPL-compliance lab, or, if you are interested in the opinion of the people whose code you intend to use, you should ask the affected projects, who may be familar with your use case. That being said, if using a LGPLd VM works well for you, by all means just use that. Since I've talked with you recently on the Kaffe lists, I assume the GPLd VM in this case is Kaffe, so I'll add that distributing a build of Kaffe for Windows CE is fine, as long as you follow GPL's provisions regarding the redistribution (i.e. all users receiving the executables from you can get the source code for that particular Kaffe build with all your patches and extensions to it). As Per said, there are cases in embedded software development when external factors make it very hard to follow GPL's provisions, so if you, for example, wanted to inject a GPLd VM directly into the proprietary WinCE kernel, you'd have to clear that with Microsoft first. I'd additionally suggest making sure that your users understand that the license, which covers your non-GPLd product does not cover the GPLd VM, and vice versa ... so users know they receive two separate products, at least one of which they can use, study, modify and redistribute freely themselves, namely the GPLd VM, in that case. cheers, dalibor topic ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Roman Kennke wrote: Hi there, Am Freitag, den 20.01.2006, 13:05 -0800 schrieb Per Bothner: Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi Phillipe, On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 15:03 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed in a commercial product. There should be no trouble at all freely redistributing such a thing in a commercial product. Just make sure you distribute the source code for it to your users. Just to clarify: Depends what you mean by "it". If you mean the VM, that may not be enough, since in an embedded environment it is likely the VM is linked in with the commercial product. In that case you may also have to freely redistributing source for the commercial product. AFAICS this is true for the GPL, but not so with the GPL+linking exception under which GNU Classpath is distibuted. Maybe someone with more insight in the license (Mark? Dalibor?) could clarify this? Correct, but the comment was "GPL VM". I assumed he was talking about a "VM" that was GPL'd - not the Classpath libraries - which do not include a VM. -- --Per Bothner [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://per.bothner.com/ ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi, Thanks for the answers. Yes, I mean rather Java VMs as seen as belonging to seperate categories according to their licensing requirements. Yet, the information you provide seems to be in contraditction somewhat with what they have at http://sablevm.org/wiki/License_FAQ Thanks, Philippe Laporte Software Gatespace Telematics Första Långgatan 18 41328 Göteborg Sweden Phone: +46 702 04 35 11 Fax: +46 31 24 16 50 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Per Bothner wrote: Roman Kennke wrote: Hi there, Am Freitag, den 20.01.2006, 13:05 -0800 schrieb Per Bothner: Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi Phillipe, On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 15:03 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: It is our understanding that a GPL VM can't be freely redistributed in a commercial product. There should be no trouble at all freely redistributing such a thing in a commercial product. Just make sure you distribute the source code for it to your users. Just to clarify: Depends what you mean by "it". If you mean the VM, that may not be enough, since in an embedded environment it is likely the VM is linked in with the commercial product. In that case you may also have to freely redistributing source for the commercial product. AFAICS this is true for the GPL, but not so with the GPL+linking exception under which GNU Classpath is distibuted. Maybe someone with more insight in the license (Mark? Dalibor?) could clarify this? Correct, but the comment was "GPL VM". I assumed he was talking about a "VM" that was GPL'd - not the Classpath libraries - which do not include a VM. ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
Hi Philippe, On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:31 +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: > Thanks for the answers. > > Yes, I mean rather Java VMs as seen as belonging to seperate categories > according to their licensing requirements. > > Yet, the information you provide seems to be in contraditction somewhat > with what they have at > http://sablevm.org/wiki/License_FAQ As said before GNU Classpath itself doesn't come with a runtime at this time. GNU does provide one through GCC (libgcj/gij) and that one comes under the same distribution terms as GNU Classpath itself (GPL + Exception). If you have legal questions about that then please do contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] since this really is the technical mailing-list. If you have questions about non-GNU, GPL-covered runtimes then it is best to contact the copyright holders of those runtimes to ask for their opinions. (BTW. Random pages on the interweb explaining the policies of some "rival" runtime are not the most reliable information source...) Cheers, Mark signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: Win CE port
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 01:31:33PM +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote: > Hi, > Thanks for the answers. > > Yes, I mean rather Java VMs as seen as belonging to seperate categories > according to their licensing requirements. > > Yet, the information you provide seems to be in contraditction somewhat > with what they have at > http://sablevm.org/wiki/License_FAQ Microsoft for a while ran a 'Get the Facts' campaign, where their executives claimed the GPL was a cancer, and would magically infect all so called 'intellectual property' of companies, if they don't take a lot of care to avoid using GNU/Linux. SCO for a while ran a campaign where they claimed that the GPL was unconstitutional, unamerican, and aiding terrorists. You can find it on the internet, in written form. That does not make the claims above by Microsoft and SCO true. The Internet is a big place. One of its strengths is that it allows everyone to publish content easily, even content outside of their area of expertise. That puts the burden on the reader to disseminate FUD from fact, in particular if they want to make business decisions based on that information. If you are looking for facts on how the GPL works, the FSF is the authoritative source. If you are looking for facts on how the GPL works in the context of GPLd runtimes, the FSF and the authors of such runtimes are an authoritative source. If you are looking for uninformed opinions on other free software projects' licensing choices made by non-lawyers, I am sure the Internet has got some of that too. It's up to you how much credit you give it, though. cheers, dalibor topic ___ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://developer.classpath.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
