[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 64 bit official Windows builds

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: 64 bit official Windows builds
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 13:09:26 +0200

> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 02:44:26 -0800 (PST)
> From: Sam Halliday <>
> Injection-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 10:44:26 +0000
> On Friday, 8 January 2016 09:12:20 UTC, Eli Zaretskii  wrote:
> > No, this compromise contradicts the GPL.  The sources must be
> > available from the same place as the binaries
> Are you sure about this?

Yes, quite sure.  Other ways are theoretically possible, but they are
all impractical.

> My understanding is that source code is to be provided if it is requested:

Are you (you personally) really going to provide a service of this
kind?  And request that anyone who receives the binaries will have to
provide the same service as well?  Sounds unlikely.  Actually, sounds
like a lip service to me.  And it still requires you to have the
sources handy, for when someone requests them, because you cannot
control what is available at any given time on other sites.

> I believe a GNU Emacs 64bit Windows download should be self-contained and 
> include all runtime DLLs that are necessary for it to run.

That's fine, and I don't disagree.  You just have to provide the
sources used to compile those DLLs from the same place.  Which
shouldn't be a problem, at least not theoretically, since either you
have built them yourself, or you downloaded the binaries from some
GPL-compatible site, which then must provide the sources they used,

FWIW, I do this for 32-bit builds of all the optional libraries needed
by Emacs, see here:

It's possible, and it's practically doable.  It is more work than just
building Emacs, though.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]