From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32007 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2006 03:44:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 31991 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2006 03:44:21 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net (HELO mtiwmhc11.worldnet.att.net) (204.127.131.115) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 03:44:21 +0000 Received: from dfw5rb41 (h-66-167-81-67.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net[66.167.81.67]) by worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc11) with SMTP id <200604260344191110050fode>; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 03:44:19 +0000 From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" To: "'The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List'" Subject: Re: Windows 95 Support (was mis-subjected "RE: cygwin Perl 5x slower than ActiveState?" for some unknowable reason) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 03:44:00 -0000 Message-ID: <000701c668e3$b2a1f060$020aa8c0@DFW5RB41> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <04d501c66850$08173990$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List X-SW-Source: 2006-q2/txt/msg00139.txt.bz2 > From: Dave Korn [snip] > > Since we're getting all licencey today, allow me to point out > > something any one of us should have caught long ago: setup.exe as > > distributed on the Cygwin web site does not include a copy > of the GPL, > > which, while IANAL, I believe is a violation of the GPL. > > LicensOR is allowed to distribute licensOR's own > copyrighted software any damn way LicensOR wishes, since GPL > obligations apply to licensEE. Guess RedHat has decided not > to sue itself gratuitously. > So, since LicensOR is me (and several dozen other people, and Red Hat), none of us have to obey either the spirit or letter of the GPL? Or are we supposed to sue ourselves round-robin style? You've lost me Dave. Perhaps a quick grep through the source for copyright notices will clarify things. Oh, and watch the potty mouth. > > ("Source > > code for setup.exe is available from > http://cygwin.com/setup/." - no, > > it isn't, at least not for 2.510.2.2). > > Yes it is. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Index of /setup/current > > Icon Name Last modified Size > Description[DIR] Parent > Directory - > [ ] setup-2.510.2.2.exe 30-Nov-2005 21:42 299K > [ ] setup-2.510.2.2.tar.bz2 08-Sep-2005 16:14 656K > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Guess what's in the tarball, Gary! What tarball? When I posted the message to which you refer, there was no tarball there, as you are of course now all too aware. Luckily, I was able to bring this state of affairs to the attention of the proper authorities and get it corrected before any LicensORs or LicensEEs were harmed. Said it before, say it again: measure twice, cut once. > Yes, you thought it was > just the executable, No, I thought it wasn't there. Which it wasn't. > only zipped up to make it three times > bigger than the raw binary, but no! It's the source! > And now it's actually there, thanks to my sharp eye and Brian's mad ftp skillz. You're more than welcome Korns. If there's anything more I can do to help, just give me a shout. > > cheers, > DaveK > -- > Can't think of a witty .sigline today.... Indeed. -- Gary R. Van Sickle