Re: When will 2007 standard be available in gcc-ada?

[Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>]

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 15:19 +0200, Martin Krischik wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus schrieb:
> > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 13:55 +0200, Martin Krischik wrote:
> > 
> >> There is no *relevant* 
> >> difference between GPL vs. LGPL vs. MGPL for an exe - only for dll's and 
> >> lib's it make a *relevant* difference.
> > 
> > If the GCC executables are spread across linkable object files,
> > this doesn't make a difference.
> 
> And how is that a *relevant* restriction?

That's relevant to avoiding (unintended) gossip about .lib or .dll
somehow removing license restrictions--they don't and this could be
a most welcome source of misunderstandings (in fact, has been).


> I think you miss understood me. Let's move away from compiler.

I'm trying to prevent misunderstandings. It is important not to move
away from the compiler in question (GCC) when discussion the licensing
issues with editions of this compiler. GCC reads input and produces
output. Any typical Ada program translated by GCC will call run-time
subprograms using data structures linked to it. So when using GCC as
the compiler, user will have to be aware that there are licenses on
the GNAT run-time. Some editions of GCC display a special exception
(GnuAda, FSF) where the other (AdaCore) doesn't.

A free beer compiler might have licenses quite different from GMGPL
and  still be a free beer compiler; for example, it might permit
making changes to its Ada run-time sources for closed source programs
distributed to 3rd parties. GMGPL does not permit this. (The Eiffel
forum license does; but it always kind of stipulated fair use.)
I find it important to keep the notions apart.

> Using a GPL licence compiler does not make your program bound by the 
> GPL.

Using "GCC" may or it may not make my program be bound by the GPL.
This is what I have been trying to make more precise, as the term
"GCC" is somewhat generic. I don't expect users to consider which
part of the GNAT tool set (a) constitutes the compiler proper and
(b) which parts are used by the preprocessor, compiler, binder,
and linker to produce an executable, or a library. The compiler
does not change the license of input, but it *does* add to the
set of sources required to produce output. Hence it changes the
overall licensing situation.

>  The compiler does not change the licence of files you compile.

Also, GCC doesn't change the license of software that it links
to the executable produced, if any, and so it is important to know
what you can or cannot do using GnuAda or FSF GNAT Ada run-time
sources, which, again, might rely on system libraries and their
respective licenses.


Perhaps we are in violent agreement?