[Python-Dev] Is msvcr71.dll re-redistributable?
t-meyer at ihug.co.nz
Wed Feb 2 09:38:00 CET 2005
[Thanks for bringing this up, BTW, Thomas].
>> The 2.4 python.org installer installs msvcr71.dll on the
>> target system.
>> If someone uses py2exe or a similar tool to create a frozen
>> application, is he allowed to redistribute this msvcr71.dll
>> to other users together with his application or not, even if
>> he doesn't own MSVC?
> According to the EULA,
Is that the EULA of MS VC++?
> you may distribute anything listed in redist.txt:
And, just to be clear, mscvr71.dll is in redist.txt?
> """2.2 Redistributable Code-General. Microsoft grants you a
> nonexclusive, royalty-free right to reproduce and distribute
> the object code form of any portion of the Software listed in
> REDIST.TXT ("Redistributable Code"). For general redistribution
> requirements for Redistributable Code, see Section 3.1, below."""
Is it legit to redistribute an EULA? If so, would you mind sending me a
copy of this (off-list)?
> So the right to distribute is coupled to the a) the EULA and b)
> redist.txt. (As a side note, the Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
> 2003 for example contains NO redistributables per redist.txt).
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?
> 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.
Should people in this situation just stick with 2.3 or buy a copy of a MS
More information about the Python-Dev