Re: this affects DotGNU (was: this doesn't affect DotGNU (was Re: [DotGNU]New addendum for MS redistributables))

[Barry Fitzgerald]

The big thing here is the dependancy on the redistributables.  If a
library were created (LGPL'ed or GPL'ed, of course) that was entirely (or
mostly) compatible with the MS libs, and a linker were created (or maybe
modify ld?) for working with this lib, we could completely replace the
dependancy.  This is a lot of work, though.

But, the real issue at stake is whether the code would be portable to
other libs under different licenses.  If MS tried to make this claim, I
highly doubt that it would stand up in court... Though I could be wrong.

In either case, yes - this hobbles any program created with MS development
tools.

        -Barry



On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, David Sugar wrote:
>
> Reading it carefully, this claim does not just seem to apply to the MFC
> stuff, but also to the core C runtime libraries, which suggest anything
> created with VS.NET that happens to link to any MS library could
> potentially be license hobbled.
>
> Carsten Kuckuk wrote:
>
> >The first paragraph notes the products whose EULAs this affects. It only
> >appears to affect some .NET products.
> ><<<<<
> >
> >It affects all variants of Visual Studio.NET. Microsoft's Visual Studio
> >products
> >are used by almost everybody writing software on the Windows platform for a
> >living.
> >
> >Microsoft's "redistributables" are certain parts of .NET, such as the
> >runtime,
> >that it makes redistributable, albeit under restrictive terms. This is in
> >the
> >same manner that the JDK allows you to redistribute the Java runtime with
> >the
> >program, to ensure that only one version is used to run the program.
> ><<<<<
> >
> >This is not all. When you program in the Windows world, you almost always
> >use
> >the MFC library (comparable to Qt in the Linux World) instead of the bare
> >bones
> >Win32 API (comparable to XLIB or even the X-Windows protocol). These
> >libraries
> >are not part of the Windows operating system, so each application has to be
> >shipped with its own copy of the MFC library. So whenever you install a GUI
> >program on a Windows machine, the setup has to install a copy of the MFC -
> >or
> >the program will simply not run. Take my word for it. In my daytime job I am
> >a C++ / Windows programmer.
> >
> >With VS.NET, Microsoft ships a C++ compiler that is able to generate either
> >x86 code or IL code, by just setting the /CLR option. MS claim that you
> >simply
> >have to recompile your MFC base C++ code, and your application will run
> >under
> >CLR. So this is the migration path that most ISVs with C++ code bases will
> >go:
> >They will buy VS.NET, recompile their Windows programs with /CLR and ship
> >the result as IL code - including the MFC redistributable.
> >
> >So in a nutshell, VS.NET's license conditions regarding redistributables
> >like
> >the MFC infect every ISV's license conditions. In a few months, all new
> >software
> >that is released by major ISVs has to have a line in its license that the
> >software is only allowed to run under a Windows operating system - regardles
> >if it is a native or a CLR application. This makes it illegal for Linux, BSD
> >or Lindows users to run these applications under Wine, Mono, or DotGNU.
> >
> >
> >I suppose that they could eventually impose those restrictions on software
> >developed with the VisualStudio.NET software, and this is a major problem.
> ><<<<
> >
> >That's exactly what they did.
> >
> >However, I for one am not developing with VS.NET, and I hope that you are
> >not
> >either; quite frankly, giving in to those restrictions is voluntary, and I
> >have
> >no sympathy for those who do, but know better. Also, it is not the job of
> >ilrun
> >to check the license of a program to make sure that it is legal to run.
> ><<<<<
> >
> >I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I have a wife and a child
> >to feed and rent to pay. That's why I have to work as a Windows programmer.
> >
> >Carsten Kuckuk
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Developers mailing list
> >address@hidden
> >http://subscribe.dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://subscribe.dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
>

address@hidden
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org