Hi,
Thanks for all your feedback regarding this license subject. We will follow
your advice and ask a lawyer specialist in the matter.
Pierre
Le mer. 26 févr. 2020 à 17:37, MrPmghost . a écrit :
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am Pierre Meignen, software developer working for a belgium company.
>
> I have a q
source distribution anyway, so that's no problem
at all.
Apart from that, Brian is right. You should really ask a lawyer who's
specialized in licensing. Nobody here is qualified to give an answer
standing up in court.
Corinna
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:04 PM Brian Inglis w
d on
> third party donated and supported domain names and infrastructure.
>
> Copyright and licence compliance is your responsibility if you download any
> binaries or sources. As you are based in Belgium in the EU you also have to
> comply with Belgian and EU law which may have
nated and supported domain names and infrastructure.
Copyright and licence compliance is your responsibility if you download any
binaries or sources. As you are based in Belgium in the EU you also have to
comply with Belgian and EU law which may have stricter copyright and licensing
compliance requirement
Hi,
I am Pierre Meignen, software developer working for a belgium company.
I have a question regarding cygwin and its use.
Is it allowed/legal to integrate cygwin installer (2.11.1(0.329/5/3)) into
the installer of an application that we plan to distribute commercially?
I have checked the pas
Follow-up:
On 2017-10-25 06:22 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
When running OpenSSH server under cygwin on a windows machine,
does each SSH connection require a buying CAL (client access license)
from microsoft?
Wes Miller, Research VP at Microsoft [1] answered my similar question
on the PowerShell/O
On 25 October 2017 at 20:22, Assaf Gordon wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When running OpenSSH server under cygwin on a windows machine,
> does each SSH connection require a buying CAL (client access license) from
> microsoft?
>
> More concretely,
> If I have a "Windows 10 Home" and I run Cygwin + OpenSSH ser
Hello,
When running OpenSSH server under cygwin on a windows machine,
does each SSH connection require a buying CAL (client access license)
from microsoft?
More concretely,
If I have a "Windows 10 Home" and I run Cygwin + OpenSSH server,
can multiple users connect and run programs at the same
On 2016-08-11 12:26, m.gai...@comcast.net wrote:
The question is: What's the license for setup-x86.exe and setup-x86_64.exe
itself?
GPLv2+, as indicated in the sources:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=cygwin-apps/setup.git;a=tree
--
Yaakov
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.
ols.
The question is: What's the license for setup-x86.exe and setup-x86_64.exe
itself?
I see the FAQ and the licensing page, and AFAICT those are discussing the items
installed by Cygwin and the Cygwin runtime, rather than _just_ the installer.
Running 'strings' on the installer
On 03/05/2012 11:38 PM, Fedin Pavel wrote:
On 03.05.2012 19:24, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Right. I've noticed the incompleteness of elf.h from time to time
too but
extending it would be tedious since you can't just cut/paste from a
GPLv*
file. Maybe one of the BSDs has something more complet
On 03.05.2012 19:24, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Right. I've noticed the incompleteness of elf.h from time to time too but
extending it would be tedious since you can't just cut/paste from a GPLv*
file. Maybe one of the BSDs has something more complete these days?
By the way, interesting questio
Hi,
It seems to me that when searching the cygwin-licensing ml at
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-licensing/, it is actually the cygwin ml
that is being searched.
Regards,
Shaddy
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Érsek László wrote:
>
> > after grepping the cygwin mailing list and my up-to-date cygwin
> > installation for "nftw" and "fts_open", I thought that it could make sense
> > (and fun) to implement nftw().
>
> Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) the who
ygwin-talk to see what
cygwin-talk is all about. Basically it is a place to go if you have
questions or observations that are either off-topic or too silly for
this mailing list.
You can also go to the cygwin-licensing mailing list if you have
licensing questions. This is a moderated list with
Gary R. Van Sickle schrieb:
>cgf:
Does maildir even work without resorting to managed mounts?
Nope, it can't. Special chars in the filenames which Windows either doesn't
support at all or treats differently than Unii. Maildir is a decent idea
implemented in a non-POSIX, non-portable manner.
And t
[Making a conscious decision to snip in-the-clear email addresses, because
I'm not Above The Law]
> Reini Urban wrote:
>
> > So we could follow Igor's suggestion providing the sources in the
> > binary package and compile it after download.
> >http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-05/msg01654
Reini Urban wrote:
> So we could follow Igor's suggestion providing the sources in the binary
> package and compile it after download.
>http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-05/msg01654.html
> At least better than nothing. exim would need a comparative and simplier
> MTA.
>
> I failed with try
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 06:34:52PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>Christopher Faylor schrieb:
>>You might check into how the netqmail does this:
>> http://www.qmail.org/netqmail/
>>
>>They don't seem to offer binaries, so I assume the licensing problems
>>sti
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
It's vanishingly unlikely that we'll get DJB's approval.
True.
You might check into how the netqmail does this:
http://www.qmail.org/netqmail/
They don't seem to offer binaries, so I assume the licensing problems
still exist.
So we could foll
l porting thread
> http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-05/msg01593.html
>also drifted into something completely different. (mysql server)
>
>Still waiting on DJB's approval?
It's vanishingly unlikely that we'll get DJB's approval.
You might check into how the netqmail d
What are the isues about qmail license restrictions now?
Most know that it's vastly "superior" over other MTA's.
(i.e. people tend to like it more)
E.g. sourceware uses qmail
http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#what-software
I see in the thread around
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-05/ms
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..."off the hook".
Think of a fish on a hook. If you're "off the hook", you're OK. (Or
maybe you're dead, which comes to the same thing in the end, I suppose :-).
Just kidding. It just means you do not have (some) problem any more.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.
On Sep 17 08:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >In that case your definitely off the hook :-)
>
> Excuse me for my english translation but I don't understand what you mean
> for
> ..."off the hook".
It means, you're doing fine.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regar
>-- Messaggio originale --
>Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 11:05:12 +0200
>From: Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Cygwin licensing issue
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>On Sep 15 10:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>
On Sep 15 10:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> There is someone that can make me understand what is intendend for "proprietary
> use" at
>
> http://cygwin.com/faq/faq_7.html#SEC132
>
> other authoritary information in Cygwin FAQ section about cygwin software
>
There is someone that can make me understand what is intendend for "proprietary
use" at
http://cygwin.com/faq/faq_7.html#SEC132
other authoritary information in Cygwin FAQ section about cygwin software
licensing
http://cygwin.com/faq/faq_1.html#SEC4
I would to know if I can use Cy
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
> Of Elfyn McBratney
> Scott Copus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The FAQ mentions the full package itself is approximately 800MB--NOT
> > INCLUDING the source code. If I were required to include the source
> > code (even if it's still t
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 10:45:17AM -0500, Scott Copus wrote:
>Bill C. Riemers wrote:
>>Actually, if the are university computers, then only university needs
>>to have access to the source. The GPL only requires that if you are
>>distribute the binaries, that you also distribute the source. It say
Bill C. Riemers wrote:
Actually, if the are university computers, then only university needs to
have access to the source. The GPL only requires that if you are distribute
the binaries, that you also distribute the source. It says nothing about
providing source for your own computers. That is t
st 21, 2003 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: Licensing for academic computer labs at a university
> Scott,
>
> Note that the GPL only requires you to provide the source for the binaries
> you distribute. So, if you set up a shared network drive with the sources
> that were pre-installed on the hard-d
s you to provide the source for the
>binaries you distribute. So, if you set up a shared network drive with
>the sources that were pre-installed on the hard-drives, that should be
>quite enough to satisfy the GPL (however, IANAL, so please consult a
>lawyer if you are worried about licensin
> > The FAQ mentions the full package itself is approximately
> 800MB--NOT
> > INCLUDING the source code. If I were required to include
> the source
> > code (even if it's still tarred and g-zipped), then does
> anyone know how
> > much space would that require?
>
> Binary ~400MB, source ~5
ould that require?
>
> Binary ~400MB, source ~500MB. Something like that anyway.
> -- Elfyn
Scott,
Note that the GPL only requires you to provide the source for the binaries
you distribute. So, if you set up a shared network drive with the sources
that were pre-installed on the hard-drive
Scott Copus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would it be possible to incorporate Cygwin into computer lab images for
> computer labs at an educational institution for academic use by students?
>
> Would the source have to be included too if it was included on each hard
> drive of a lab work
Hi,
Would it be possible to incorporate Cygwin into computer lab images for
computer labs at an educational institution for academic use by students?
Would the source have to be included too if it was included on each hard
drive of a lab workstation? (I'm talking about a pre-installed
package
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 11:18:17AM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> Good write-up.
>
> Is any portion of cygwin covered by the LGPL instead of the GPL?
No.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developermailto:[E
Good write-up.
Is any portion of cygwin covered by the LGPL instead of the GPL?
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html
The LGPL explicitly allows proprietary software to be built on top of opensource
libraries.
TIA
Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
>> > > Hi all!
>> > >
>> > > I wrote a small scr
On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 11:31:05AM +0530, Rajagopalan, Karthik wrote:
>According to Cygwin, some tools are under GNU, some are under X11, some
>are under public domain. I want to know the executables which are
>under this category. Where can i get this information?
>From the source code.
FWIW,
Hai,
According to Cygwin, some tools are under GNU, some are under X11, some
are under public domain. I want to know the executables which are under this
category. Where can i get this information?
with regards,
Karthik.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug
day, May 07, 2002 12:26 AM
> To: 'Harold Hunt'
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Licensing issues
>
>
> Hello from Gregg C Levine
> There is nothing wrong with my browser, except that the connection is
> temperamental. I wanted to make sure. I hav
t [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 12:20 AM
> To: Gregg C Levine; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Licensing issues
>
> Gregg,
>
> Is your web browser broken?
> http://cygwin.com/licensing.html
>
> Harold
>
> > -Original Message-
Gregg,
Is your web browser broken?
http://cygwin.com/licensing.html
Harold
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of Gregg C Levine
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 12:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Licensing issue
Hello from Gregg C Levine
What exactly is the license, that Cygwin is distributed under? I mean,
some of the parts of it, are covered under the GPL, so shouldn't the
division extend itself to cover it?
---
Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 03:29:43PM +0100, Erik B wrote:
>
> Hi Corinna
>
> Thanks for the answer
>
> My application is a pure windows application,
> which accesses postgreSQL using JDBC.
> It does not use the cygwin.dll.
>
> PostgreSQL itself uses the cygwin.dll.
>
> Can I still use cygwin wi
TECTED]>
>To: Erik B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Licensing
>Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:07:03 +0100
>
>On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 02:28:54PM +0100, Erik B wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > I have read all the documentation on cygwin.
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 02:28:54PM +0100, Erik B wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I have read all the documentation on cygwin.com concerning
> licensing and I have not found a clear answer to my question:
>
> I want to install a win 2000 server at a customer.
> I want to run Postgr
Hi
I have read all the documentation on cygwin.com concerning
licensing and I have not found a clear answer to my question:
I want to install a win 2000 server at a customer.
I want to run PostgreSQL on the server.
My application accesses PostgreSQL using JDBC.
I cannot put my application
48 matches
Mail list logo
