--- Wu Yongwei <adah@...> wrote: > Danny,
> It seems the guy just built the packages without making changes, and he
> provided links to all the original sites. According to my understanding
> (which might be wrong) of the GPL, I doubt it is not a violation.
Sorry, providing links to someone else's site is not sufficient.
I've been through this before. There are good reason why _only_ pointing to
another site is not sufficient.
> Best regards,
> Wu Yongwei
> --- Original Message from Danny Smith ---
> > http://www63.tok2.com/home/bitwalk/download.html
> > I am having trouble upgrading to gcc3.3.1 with the official packages,
> but can
> > with this one. It is from a credible supplier?
> The 'unofficial' packages you mention may be credible and have all good
> intenstions, but they violate the GPL because as far as I can see, they
> do not
> provide sources.
> If the bitwalk does not correct this, I intend to report to the FSF GPL
> vioation site.
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it
> help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
> YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> MinGW-users mailing list
> You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at:
http://personals.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Personals
New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time.