Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
[Caml-list] License Run-Time Question
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Al Christians <achrist@e...>
Subject: [Caml-list] License Run-Time Question
I have just started with OCaml by installing and building the 
source with Cygwin under NT.  With some guesswork, I guess I've
got it working, and I'm much impressed so far.  

Given that, I want to start using OCaml and, if I do, some 
executables from code I write in OCaml might start showing up 
on my clients'/customers' machines, and I want to be sure I'm not 
breaking any licenses.  From what I see in the archives, I'm not 
supposed to have any problems distributing executables, but I'm
not sure of the specifics of how I stay in compliance doing 
this.

In the archives I see this (199912/msg00026.html):

  >> If you write code in O'Caml, the license doesn't impose 
  >> anything on your software's license.  The LGPL license on 
  >> the runtime might force you to ensure that your program is 
  >> physically separate from the runtime so that the runtime can 
  >> be  replaced by your customers if they so desire, but this 
  >> says nothing  about the license under which your software is 
  >> distributed.

Is there any documentation available on what to include when I 
try to distribute an executable program written with OCaml, and 
how to do it so that I'm in compliance with all the relevant 
licenses?  In particular, I will probably want to distribute 
executables that come out of ocamlopt.

How do I keep the program 'physically separate'?

As I have the cygwin version of ocamlopt working, will the 
programs also need CygWin run-time dll(s)?  Which one(s)? Are 
there additional license problems distributing binaries because 
I'm using Cygwin to make my programs? 

The alternative to cygwin is MS.  I have MSVC++ v6, but not the
MS assembler.  I don't even know how much the assembler would
cost.  I'd probably buy that if I needed it when revenues are
up, but they aren't. Is that the way to go if I want to minimize
worries about license problems?

Thanks in advance much for any info.


Al Christians
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr