> > A free version of the source I presume.
> > I didn't understand the sentence about not allowing to compile with GPL
> > code. Were you trying to say that you are not allowed to run a GPLed
> > compiler on this free source code?
>
> There's a version for non commercial which can be used for 30 days, and I've
> seen somewhere a free (non GPL'd version) of QT. Both are not open sourced
> (you get libraries and headers) and you'll need either borland C++ or Visual
> Studio to compile it. Go ahead and try to compile KDE against any version of
> those compiler. heck - lets see you passing the automake/autoconf script ;)
>
> > > There is a KDE for cygwin - but cygwin is a huge layer on top of windows
> > > if you're installing it, and I don't think it worths it.
> >
> > Why not? Selling a full application suite for Windows (maybe only for
> > home users of Windows) for 100 NIS looks attractive to me. In addition
> > to home users I would try to sell such a suite to the Education
> > ministry. This would also require support so looks like there is a
> > chance to do some business here.
> > However what do you mean by KDE for cygwin? Doesn't any native Linux
> > application can run on cygwin out of the tar ball?
>
> No, it needs to be recompiled. Cygwin gives you a unix like enviroment, but
> it's totally incompatible (binary sense) from Linux native, so you'll have to
> recompile KDE from scratch or get KDE 2.2.1 for Cygwin. (there is no KDE 3.0
> for cygwin yet)
>
> Hetz
If Cygwin gives a unix like environment what are the problems with
recompiling KDE 3.0 from scratch? Alternatively, what are the
differences between the source of KDE 2.2.1 for Cygwin and (the source
of) KDE 2.2.1 for Linux?
--
Shaul Karl, [EMAIL PROTECTED] e t
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
