ftp.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2002/04/19/19:03:09

Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: strange source packaging?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 08:11:00 +1000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
Message-ID: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA7600C5E80@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Earnie Boyd" <Cygwin-Apps AT cygwin DOT com>,
"Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g3JN39K09414

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com] 
> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 12:20 AM

> <Section 2.a>
> You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices 
> stating that you chaned the files and the date of any change. 
> </Section 2.a>
> A differences file alone doesn't accomplish.  You must state 
> in the file header (a prominent place of notice) that you 
> changed the file.  

Given the definition of a prominent place of notice, it can be argued
that a difference file is just that. It's prominent and states the exact
changes made - in both human and computer readable form no less.

> Back to the subject at hand, source packaging and the con to 
> Robert's argument.  I can in my wisdom download the 
> individual binary and accompaning source.  At that point I 
> should be able to rebuild an exacting duplicate from the 
> source package with supplied scripts found within the source 
> package 

Exactly. 'source package' here can mean more than one file. There is no
requirement in the GPL that the source be provided as a single entity,
just that it be provided in it's entirety. So I don't understand your
reasoning for why a pristine source + patches + cygwin build script does
not meet the criteria. Certianly debian + *BSD ports systems seem to
find it feasible.

> <Section 3, para. 5>
> These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.  If 
> identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the 
> Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and 
> separate works in themselves, then this License, and its 
> terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute 
> them as separate works.  But when you distribute the same 
> sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the 
> Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms 
> of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend 
> to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part 
> regardless of who wrote it. </Section 3, para 5>

Yup. That's what we are conforming with. 


- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019