[Thanks for bringing this up, BTW, Thomas].
[Thomas Heller]
[Vincent Wehren]
According to the EULA,
Is that the EULA of MS VC++?
The full text of the EULA for Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 can be found at http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/eula.aspx
For VS.NET: http://proprietary.clendons.co.nz/licenses/eula/VisualStudiodotnetEnterpriseArchitect2002-eula.htm
you may distribute anything listed in redist.txt:
And, just to be clear, mscvr71.dll is in redist.txt?
Not in the free toolkit; in the $-version it must be.
I'm not that familiar with the names of all these things. Is the "Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit 2003" the free thing that you can get?
Yep.
In the case of not owning a compiler at all, chances seem pretty slim you have any rights to distribute anything.
Well, I 'own' a copy of gcc, which is a compiler <wink>.
Can anyone here suggest a way to get around this? As a specific example: the SpamBayes distribution includes a py2exe binary, and it would be nice (although not essential) to build this with 2.4. However, at the moment my name goes down as the release manager, and I don't have (AFAICT) a licence to redistribute msvcr71.dl.
Okay: thinking about this for a bit longer: it is the Python interpreter that needs msvcr71.dll, right. You need the python interpreter for py2exe. The distributor of Python is allowed to redistribute msvcr71.dll, and you are acting as re-distributor for the Python interpreter (to end users) and the EULA never even cares for/applies to the frozen binary...
-- Vincent Wehren
Should people in this situation just stick with 2.3 or buy a copy of a MS compiler?
=Tony.Meyer
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
