* Win32Ada @ 1996-03-21 0:00 Pascal OBRY 1996-03-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Robert F. Estes 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Win32Ada Wiljan Derks 0 siblings, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Pascal OBRY @ 1996-03-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 911 bytes --] Hi (To => "Ada_Netters"); Where is the Win32Ada binding ? I have seen it one time but can't rebember where !!! Thanks, Pascal. -- --|------------------------------------------------------------ --| Pascal Obry Team-Ada Member | --| | --| EDF-DER-IPN-SID- Ing�nierie des Syst�mes d'Informations | --| | --| Bureau G1-010 e-mail: p.obry@der.edfgdf.fr | --| 1 Av G�n�ral de Gaulle voice : +33-1-47.65.50.91 | --| 92141 Clamart CEDEX fax : +33-1-47.65.50.07 | --| FRANCE | --|------------------------------------------------------------ --| --| http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pascal_obry --| --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1996-03-21 0:00 Win32Ada Pascal OBRY @ 1996-03-21 0:00 ` Robert F. Estes 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Win32Ada Carl J R Johansson 1996-03-29 0:00 ` Win32Ada lrharris 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Win32Ada Wiljan Derks 1 sibling, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Robert F. Estes @ 1996-03-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Pascal OBRY wrote: > = > Hi (To =3D> "Ada_Netters"); > = > Where is the Win32Ada binding ? I have seen it one time but can't rebembe= r > where !!! > = > Thanks, > Pascal. > -- > = > --|------------------------------------------------------------ > --| Pascal Obry Team-Ada Member | > --| | > --| EDF-DER-IPN-SID- Ing=E9nierie des Syst=E8mes d'Informations | > --| | > --| Bureau G1-010 e-mail: p.obry@der.edfgdf.fr | > --| 1 Av G=E9n=E9ral de Gaulle voice : +33-1-47.65.50.91 | > --| 92141 Clamart CEDEX fax : +33-1-47.65.50.07 | > --| FRANCE | > --|------------------------------------------------------------ > --| > --| http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pascal_obry > --| > --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination" Win32Ada is an Ada 95 binding for Windows. Release 2.0 works with the Microsoft Win32 Application Programming Interfac= e available on Windows NT and Windows 95. = Win32Ada has been tested on Intel 486 and Pentium platforms using Windows N= T 3.5, Windows NT 3.51, Windows 95, and the = GNAT 3.01 Ada 95 compiler. More information can be found at the following URL: http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/source-code/bindings/win32ada/win32a= da.html You can download the binding sources at the following URL: http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/source-code/bindings/win32ada/win32a= da.zip -- = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Robert F. Estes Software Engineer NASA Langley Research Center Space Systems and Concepts Division = Spacecraft and Sensors Branch PHONE: 804.864.8279 Mail Stop 328 FAX: 804.864.1975 Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 EMAIL: r.f.estes@larc.nasa.gov =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1996-03-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Robert F. Estes @ 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Carl J R Johansson 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Win32Ada Ted Dennison 1996-03-29 0:00 ` Win32Ada lrharris 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Carl J R Johansson @ 1996-03-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Robert F. Estes (R.F.Estes@LaRC.NASA.Gov) wrote: : Win32Ada is an Ada 95 binding for Windows. : Release 2.0 works with the Microsoft Win32 Application Programming Interfac= : e available on Windows NT and Windows 95. = The installation did not work for me. : Win32Ada has been tested on Intel 486 and Pentium platforms using Windows N= : T 3.5, Windows NT 3.51, Windows 95, and the = : GNAT 3.01 Ada 95 compiler. I did use that compiler. : More information can be found at the following URL: : http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/source-code/bindings/win32ada/win32a= : da.html The page said that you needed the Win32 SDK which you have to pay Microsoft some $100-$200 to get. carl.johansson@helsinki.fi : You can download the binding sources at the following URL: : http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/source-code/bindings/win32ada/win32a= : da.zip : -- = : =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= : =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= : =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D : Robert F. Estes : Software Engineer : NASA Langley Research Center : Space Systems and Concepts Division = : Spacecraft and Sensors Branch PHONE: 804.864.8279 : Mail Stop 328 FAX: 804.864.1975 : Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 EMAIL: r.f.estes@larc.nasa.gov : =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= : =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= : =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Win32Ada Carl J R Johansson @ 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Ted Dennison [not found] ` <4jf4uhINNsad@RA.DEPT.CS.YALE.EDU> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 1996-03-28 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Carl J R Johansson wrote: > > Robert F. Estes (R.F.Estes@LaRC.NASA.Gov) wrote: > > : Win32Ada has been tested on Intel 486 and Pentium platforms using Windows N= > : T 3.5, Windows NT 3.51, Windows 95, and the = > > : GNAT 3.01 Ada 95 compiler. > > I did use that compiler. > > : More information can be found at the following URL: > : http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/source-code/bindings/win32ada/win32a= > : da.html > > The page said that you needed the Win32 SDK which you have to pay > Microsoft some $100-$200 to get. I hope it didn't need Win32 SDK for the linker. Last I heard Micro$oft stopped including the linker with the Win32 SDK. You were supposed to buy Visual C++ to get the linker. That would be considerably more than $200. -- T.E.D. | Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com | | Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net | | URL - http://www.iag.net/~dennison | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <4jf4uhINNsad@RA.DEPT.CS.YALE.EDU>]
* Re: Win32Ada [not found] ` <4jf4uhINNsad@RA.DEPT.CS.YALE.EDU> @ 1996-03-29 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 1996-03-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Tom Griest wrote: > > for $49.95 to help solve this problem. {It's not too cool to have > to go out and buy a C compiler in order to use Ada!} Speaking as one who had to explain this to his management, I can agree wholeheartedly. -- T.E.D. | Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com | | Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net | | URL - http://www.iag.net/~dennison | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1996-03-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Robert F. Estes 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Win32Ada Carl J R Johansson @ 1996-03-29 0:00 ` lrharris 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: lrharris @ 1996-03-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) If you want Win32 bindings, the cheapest way is Thompson Software's $99 version of ActiveAda. Not only do you get bindings, but also a very good compiler and GUI editor. They also sell a professional edition for around $700 (I got it for a class project at the education discount of $200). They also have an Ada95 for Win95 development environment that should be out before too long (i.e. this year). Ray Harris, Chair The University of Memphis Student Chapter of the ACM email: harrisl@hermes.msci.memphis.edu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1996-03-21 0:00 Win32Ada Pascal OBRY 1996-03-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Robert F. Estes @ 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Wiljan Derks 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Renaming record discriminants Felaco 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Wiljan Derks @ 1996-03-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Pascal OBRY wrote: > > Hi (To => "Ada_Netters"); > > Where is the Win32Ada binding ? I have seen it one time but can't rebember > where !!! > You can find it on: http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/source-code/bindings/win32ada/win32ada.html Wiljan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Renaming record discriminants. 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Win32Ada Wiljan Derks @ 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Felaco 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Felaco @ 1996-04-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I just tried do something like the following: type Record_Type(Has_Value : Boolean) is record case Has_Value is when True => Value : Integer; when False => null; end case; Object : Record_Type := (Has_Value => True, Value => 1); Discriminant : Boolean renames Object.Has_Value; -- error Component : Integer renames Object.Value; -- error (there may be a typo or something in there, this is off the top of my head) The Intermetrics compiler I am using complains that: Object.Has_Value depends on discriminants of an unconstrained formal parameter with default discriminants [RM_95 8.5.1(5)] RM_95 8.5.1(5) reads: The renamed entity shall not be a subcomponent that depends on discriminants of a variable whose nominal subtype is unconstrained, unless this subtype is indefinite, or the variable is aliased. A slice of an array shall not be renamed if this restriction disallows renaming of the array. This says to me that the second renames I have is illegal. I am not sure why the first renames is illegal. Why can't I rename the discriminant? Note that in the real code, the Object is an 'in' parameter. I'm not sure if this is a language issue, a compiler problem, or just a lack of understanding on my part. Could anyone help clarify? Thanks... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Felaco Phone: x4631 (Raynet 444, Local 842) Raytheon Company Email: bcf@ssd.ray.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Renaming record discriminants. 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Renaming record discriminants Felaco @ 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft 1996-04-01 0:00 ` David Weller 1996-04-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 0 siblings, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Tucker Taft @ 1996-04-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Felaco (bcf@ssd.ray.com) wrote: : I just tried do something like the following: : type Record_Type(Has_Value : Boolean) is : record : case Has_Value is : when True => : Value : Integer; : when False => : null; : end case; : Object : Record_Type := (Has_Value => True, Value => 1); : Discriminant : Boolean renames Object.Has_Value; -- error : Component : Integer renames Object.Value; -- error : (there may be a typo or something in there, this is off the top of my head) : The Intermetrics compiler I am using complains that: : Object.Has_Value depends on discriminants of an unconstrained formal : parameter with default discriminants [RM_95 8.5.1(5)] If it really complains, then this is a compiler bug. I have not been able to reproduce this problem with a recent version of this compiler, so you should submit a formal bug report if you have a (ideally minimal) test case that shows the problem. : ... Why can't I rename the discriminant? You can rename a discriminant. Either the compiler has a bug, or the example was more complicated and perhaps there was some subtlety not communicated in the above description. : Note that in the real code, the Object is an 'in' parameter. In general, if you have a question like this, post an entire, ideally minimal, test case. When typing in a test from memory, it is very easy to leave out the critical piece of information that could explain the seemingly mysterious behavior. : I'm not sure if this is a language issue, a compiler problem, or just a : lack of understanding on my part. Could anyone help clarify? It sounds like a compiler bug, but a complete minimal test case would make it clearer. : Thanks... : Chris Felaco Phone: x4631 (Raynet 444, Local 842) : Raytheon Company Email: bcf@ssd.ray.com -Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com http://www.inmet.com/~stt/ Intermetrics, Inc. Cambridge, MA USA ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Renaming record discriminants. 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft @ 1996-04-01 0:00 ` David Weller 1996-04-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: David Weller @ 1996-04-01 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <Dp7Eoo.FLK.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>, Tucker Taft <stt@henning.camb.inmet.com> wrote: > >If it really complains, then this is a compiler bug. >... >You can rename a discriminant. Either the compiler has a bug, or >... >It sounds like a compiler bug, > What's your point, Tucker? :-) I know: Go away, I'm bugging you :-) -- Ancient man: Web apps? Java! OO stuff? Eiffel! "Real-time" stuff? C/C++! Modern man: Web apps? Ada 95! OO stuff? Ada 95! "Real-time" stuff? Ada 95! Not a revolution...but evolution. http://lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Renaming record discriminants. 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft 1996-04-01 0:00 ` David Weller @ 1996-04-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1996-04-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Tuck said: ": type Record_Type(Has_Value : Boolean) is : record : case Has_Value is : when True => : Value : Integer; : when False => : null; : end case; : Object : Record_Type := (Has_Value => True, Value => 1); : Discriminant : Boolean renames Object.Has_Value; -- error : Component : Integer renames Object.Value; -- error : (there may be a typo or something in there, this is off the top of my head) : The Intermetrics compiler I am using complains that: : Object.Has_Value depends on discriminants of an unconstrained formal : parameter with default discriminants [RM_95 8.5.1(5)] If it really complains, then this is a compiler bug. I have not been able to reproduce this problem with a recent version of this compiler, so you should submit a formal bug report if you have a (ideally minimal) test case that shows the problem." Gee Tuck, I trust the intermetrics compiler *does* complain about the missing "end record" in the above example :-) :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Win32Ada @ 1998-11-11 0:00 BARDIN Marc 1998-11-11 0:00 ` Win32Ada Henri 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk 0 siblings, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: BARDIN Marc @ 1998-11-11 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi all, using win32ada binding patched i have always the same link error "ld: cannot open -lwin32ada: no such file or directory". - First a tried to compile and link tests program (of win32ada directory), i had the same error. After i rename win32ada.a as libwin32ada.a it was better and i had some success (but some others compile & link errors..). - But it was always impossible to link (same message error) a test program in a other directory without no link to win32ada. Any suggestion would be appreciated? Thanks Marc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-11 0:00 Win32Ada BARDIN Marc @ 1998-11-11 0:00 ` Henri 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Henri @ 1998-11-11 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) COPY "win32ada.a" as "libwin32ada.a" in usr/lib ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-11 0:00 Win32Ada BARDIN Marc 1998-11-11 0:00 ` Win32Ada Henri @ 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-11-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > using win32ada binding patched i have always the same link error "ld: cannot > open -lwin32ada: no such file or directory". > - First a tried to compile and link tests program (of win32ada directory), i > had the same error. After i rename win32ada.a as libwin32ada.a it was > better and i had some success (but some others compile & link errors..). > - But it was always impossible to link (same message error) a test program > in a other directory without no link to win32ada. > > Any suggestion would be appreciated? Read the instructions on my homepage _carefully_. -- -- Jerry van Dijk | Leiden, Holland -- Team Ada | email: jdijk@acm.org -- Ada & Win32: http://stad.dsl.nl/~jvandyk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-11-12 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <01be0e3b$a980c340$5da65c8b@aptiva>, "Jerry van Dijk" <jvandyk@ibm.net> wrote: > > using win32ada binding patched i have always the same link error "ld: > cannot > > open -lwin32ada: no such file or directory". > > - First a tried to compile and link tests program (of win32ada > directory), i > > had the same error. After i rename win32ada.a as libwin32ada.a it was > > better and i had some success (but some others compile & link errors..). > > - But it was always impossible to link (same message error) a test > program > > in a other directory without no link to win32ada. > > > > Any suggestion would be appreciated? > > Read the instructions on my homepage _carefully_. Note that a problem here is that the Win32 bindings are copyrighted by Microsoft. This is very annoying, but is a problem that has still not been resolved. I think the copyright is somewhat dubious, since it could be viewed as an attempt to copyright an interface dictated by external requirements, something that has not been supported by courts (e.g. in the Borland dispute). But Intermetrics is taking the position that the copyright is valid, which means that it is not possible to post and distribute these bindings freely. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Dave Wood 1998-11-13 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dale Stanbrough ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Dave Wood @ 1998-11-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > Note that a problem here is that the Win32 bindings are > copyrighted by Microsoft. This is very annoying, but is > a problem that has still not been resolved. I think the > copyright is somewhat dubious, since it could be viewed > as an attempt to copyright an interface dictated by > external requirements, something that has not been > supported by courts (e.g. in the Borland dispute). > > But Intermetrics is taking the position that the copyright > is valid, which means that it is not possible to post and > distribute these bindings freely. More specifically, distribution requires the licensee to also license the Microsoft SDK, which is why we are able to bundle it with ObjectAda. The curious thing is how this happened in the first place. If I understand the history correctly, Intermetrics made the bindings through direct government funding, so how did we get into a situation where taxpayers paid for this, as they did GNAT, and yet have to get Bill's permission to use it? There must be some interesting story there somewhere. In any case, the real problem with Win32Ada is that it is stuck at NT 3.5. This is why we also make available an alternate binding that actually evolves with the API (and has no funny Gatesian license restrictions.) Then again there are other options like the CLAW binding. -- Dave Wood, Aonix -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows -- http://www.aonix.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood @ 1998-11-13 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Dale Stanbrough @ 1998-11-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dpw@cts.com wrote: "In any case, the real problem with Win32Ada is that it is stuck at NT 3.5. This is why we also make available an alternate binding that actually evolves with the API (and has no funny Gatesian license restrictions.) Then again there are other options like the CLAW binding." Also we have totally open source products such as WINE, which provides for the Windows API for totally non Microsoft environments such as Linux. I wonder is someone could make an Ada binding to WINE, that would just happen to have the lucky coincidence of working with Windows :-) Dale ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1998-11-13 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dale Stanbrough @ 1998-11-14 0:00 ` dewar 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar 3 siblings, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dewar @ 1998-11-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com>, dpw@cts.com wrote: > If I understand the history correctly, Intermetrics made > the bindings through direct government funding, so how > did we get into a situation where taxpayers paid for > this, as they did GNAT, and yet have to get Bill's > permission to use it? There must be some interesting > story there somewhere. Direct government funding does not guarantee data rights to the public or the government. Indeed even in the case of GNAT, which was only partially funded by the government, there is absolutely nothing to stop ACT from deciding not to distribute further versions, or to distribute further versions with some proprietary components. Nothing that is, except ACT's commitment to free software. The contract with the government, long ago terminated, has nothing to say at this point. The original contract did however specify that GNAT be released under the GPL, to ensure that at least the versions that the government did help to fund would be available. Apparently, in what I consider to be a serious mistake, the government did not make the same requirement for the Win32 bindings. It would of course have been possible to generate clean room bindings free of Microsoft control. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar @ 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-11-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dewar@gnat.com schreef in artikel <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>... > available. Apparently, in what I consider to be a serious > mistake, the government did not make the same requirement > for the Win32 bindings. It would of course have been > possible to generate clean room bindings free of Microsoft > control. Is there any reason why such a binding could not be produced again, using the latest API ? -- -- Jerry van Dijk | Leiden, Holland -- Team Ada | email: jdijk@acm.org -- Ada & Win32: http://stad.dsl.nl/~jvandyk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-11-14 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <01be0ff2$30b31ea0$96a55c8b@aptiva>, "Jerry van Dijk" <jvandyk@ibm.net> wrote: > dewar@gnat.com schreef in artikel <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>... > > available. Apparently, in what I consider to be a serious > > mistake, the government did not make the same requirement > > for the Win32 bindings. It would of course have been > > possible to generate clean room bindings free of Microsoft > > control. > > Is there any reason why such a binding could not be produced again, > using the latest API ? Of course there is no reason, it is simply a question of who has the knowledge, skill, time and resources to make this happen. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-16 0:00 ` dennison 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72kno3$q7f$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > In article <01be0ff2$30b31ea0$96a55c8b@aptiva>, > "Jerry van Dijk" <jvandyk@ibm.net> wrote: > > dewar@gnat.com schreef in artikel > <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>... > > > available. Apparently, in what I consider to be a > serious > > > mistake, the government did not make the same > requirement > > > for the Win32 bindings. It would of course have been > > > possible to generate clean room bindings free of > Microsoft > > > control. > > > > Is there any reason why such a binding could not be > produced again, > > using the latest API ? > > Of course there is no reason, it is simply a question of > who has the knowledge, skill, time and resources to make > this happen. > Doesn't the "clean room" method actually require someone who has *no* knowledge of the API (from Microsoft-derived sources) to do the work? I'd think finding such people who would volunteer their time for this effort would be difficult. That means it would have to be bankrolled by some company or university, who would surely be sued by Microsoft anyway... The AJPO was probably our last, best hope for making this happen. -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison @ 1998-11-16 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72pd90$f3e$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dennison@telepath.com wrote: > In article <72kno3$q7f$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > In article <01be0ff2$30b31ea0$96a55c8b@aptiva>, > > "Jerry van Dijk" <jvandyk@ibm.net> wrote: > > > dewar@gnat.com schreef in artikel > > <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>... > > > > available. Apparently, in what I consider to be a > > serious > > > > mistake, the government did not make the same > > requirement > > > > for the Win32 bindings. It would of course have been > > > > possible to generate clean room bindings free of > > Microsoft > > > > control. > > > > > > Is there any reason why such a binding could not be > > produced again, > > > using the latest API ? > > > > Of course there is no reason, it is simply a question of > > who has the knowledge, skill, time and resources to make > > this happen. > > > > Doesn't the "clean room" method actually require someone who has *no* > knowledge of the API (from Microsoft-derived sources) to do the work? I'd > think finding such people who would volunteer their time for this effort > would be difficult. That means it would have to be bankrolled by some company > or university, who would surely be sued by Microsoft anyway... > > The AJPO was probably our last, best hope for making this happen. Please don't make such allegations without some basis in reality. The entire Win32 environment has been cloned, e.g. in the context of OS/2, and Microsoft is not in the business of suing people who do this! -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-18 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 2 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-11-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72pu4o$us2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com writes: > Please don't make such allegations without some basis in > reality. The entire Win32 environment has been cloned, e.g. > in the context of OS/2, and Microsoft is not in the > business of suing people who do this! Didn't IBM have certain legal rights in this area when they split with Microsoft in the development effort ? Both market "DOS". Larry Kilgallen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-11-17 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <1998Nov16.165814.1@eisner>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: > In article <72pu4o$us2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com writes: > > > Please don't make such allegations without some basis in > > reality. The entire Win32 environment has been cloned, e.g. > > in the context of OS/2, and Microsoft is not in the > > business of suing people who do this! > > Didn't IBM have certain legal rights in this area when they split > with Microsoft in the development effort ? Both market "DOS". What has that got to do with the OS/2 Win32 bindings? -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-11-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72qra5$p24$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com writes: > In article <1998Nov16.165814.1@eisner>, > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: >> In article <72pu4o$us2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > dewarr@my-dejanews.com writes: >> >> > Please don't make such allegations without some basis > in >> > reality. The entire Win32 environment has been cloned, > e.g. >> > in the context of OS/2, and Microsoft is not in the >> > business of suing people who do this! >> >> Didn't IBM have certain legal rights in this area when > they split >> with Microsoft in the development effort ? Both market > "DOS". > > > What has that got to do with the OS/2 Win32 bindings? At the time of the split, IBM may have gotten some rights to Windows bindings. One would have to see the contract to be sure, and one would have to engage in endless newsgroup wrangling to still not settle whether that was legally significant. Larry Kilgallen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-11-17 0:00 ` dennison 1998-11-18 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 2 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72pu4o$us2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > In article <72pd90$f3e$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > dennison@telepath.com wrote: > > would be difficult. That means it would have to be > bankrolled by some company > > or university, who would surely be sued by Microsoft > anyway... > > Please don't make such allegations without some basis in > reality. The entire Win32 environment has been cloned, e.g. > in the context of OS/2, and Microsoft is not in the > business of suing people who do this! Actually, Microsoft originally wrote OS/2 under contract from IBM, until version 1.3. Supposedly Micrsoft stopped after that on IBM's insistence, but they still have a cross-licensing agreement in place (see http://www.teamos2.org/info/history.html for more information ) But in any event, if ACT wants to try to produce a liberated Win32 binding, I certainly don't want to be seen as discouraging. -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison @ 1998-11-18 0:00 ` Al Christians 2 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Al Christians @ 1998-11-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > > Please don't make such allegations without some basis in > reality. The entire Win32 environment has been cloned, e.g. > in the context of OS/2, and Microsoft is not in the > business of suing people who do this! > IBM put Win32 into OS/2 under a joint licensing deal with MS. MS responded with Win32 1.1, which was not compatible with what IBM had in OS/2. IBM then gave up on trying to keep up with MS's product evolution. If it was too much for them, it may be hard to find a crew that's going to do it gratis for Ada. Al ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-11-16 0:00 ` dennison 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1 sibling, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewar@gnat.com wrote: > Direct government funding does not guarantee data rights > to the public or the government. Indeed even in the case > of GNAT, which was only partially funded by the government, > there is absolutely nothing to stop ACT from deciding not > to distribute further versions, or to distribute further > versions with some proprietary components. Nothing that is, > except ACT's commitment to free software. The contract with > the government, long ago terminated, has nothing to say at > this point. Yes, but wouldn't the GPL have "something to say"? My understanding is that GPL'ed software cannot be taken private, or bestowed with private components. -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison @ 1998-11-16 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dennison@telepath.com wrote: > In article <72inaf$8it$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > dewar@gnat.com wrote: > > > Direct government funding does not guarantee data rights > > to the public or the government. Indeed even in the case > > of GNAT, which was only partially funded by the government, > > there is absolutely nothing to stop ACT from deciding not > > to distribute further versions, or to distribute further > > versions with some proprietary components. Nothing that is, > > except ACT's commitment to free software. The contract with > > the government, long ago terminated, has nothing to say at > > this point. > > Yes, but wouldn't the GPL have "something to say"? My understanding is that > GPL'ed software cannot be taken private, or bestowed with private components. Once again, as has often been pointed out here, the GPL has nothing at all to say about distribution, and the fact that ACT continues to make public distributions of GNAT is not dictated by the GPL! As for components, you certainly cannot make modifications to GPL'ed software without the result being GPL'ed, but if the components are separate programs (GLADE, ASIS, and other tools), there is absolutely no reason to make these GPL'ed except that ACT has a policy of doing so! Indeed a common method for proprietarizing things if that is what you want to do, is to build separated components that are proprietary, e.g. libraries, runtimes, tools etc. This is not just theory, it has happened on more than one occasion! Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-17 0:00 ` dennison 0 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72pv17$vp8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > In article <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > As for components, you certainly cannot make modifications > to GPL'ed software without the result being GPL'ed, but if > the components are separate programs (GLADE, ASIS, and > other tools), there is absolutely no reason to make these > GPL'ed except that ACT has a policy of doing so! Ahhh. I misunderstood "components" of Gnat to mean actual parts of the Gnat program, rather than completely separate programs that just happen to be helpful while developing software with Gnat. I would have been more likely to use the term "tool" there (as I notice you did above). -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 1998-11-19 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1 sibling, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-11-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes: >Yes, but wouldn't the GPL have "something to say"? My understanding is that >GPL'ed software cannot be taken private, or bestowed with private components. Depends on what you mean by "private". The GPL only imposes limitations on what restrictions you can impose on copies of software you choose to distribute, but it does not (and cannot) create any obligation to distribute the software at all or to any specific person or group of people. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner @ 1998-11-19 0:00 ` Al Christians 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1 sibling, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Al Christians @ 1998-11-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Richard Kenner wrote: > > In article <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes: > >Yes, but wouldn't the GPL have "something to say"? My understanding is that > >GPL'ed software cannot be taken private, or bestowed with private components. > > Depends on what you mean by "private". The GPL only imposes > limitations on what restrictions you can impose on copies of software > you choose to distribute, but it does not (and cannot) create any > obligation to distribute the software at all or to any specific person > or group of people. The GPL or some of the explanatory materials that were distributed with it points out that there may be some conflicts between the GPL and other contractual arrangements with other parties that bind particular users of GPL'd items. The GPL does not bend on account of those arrangements, and it's up to the user of the GPL'd items to act according to the GPL or to refrain from using the GPL'd items. If a GPL'd item or a derivative of a GPL'd item is created in a way that some other conflicting license or contract also applies, then whoever tried to satisfy both arrangements probably made a mistake. Of course, with something like Win32 bindings, the existence of a conflicting requirement would only be determined by direct contact with the attorneys of MS, something we wouldn't wish on anyone, so the area is perhaps inherently murky. Here's something that I don't understand about the GPL: Does it allow any restrictions on copying of GPL'd works? Are any means by which I come into possession of a copy of GPL'd work legitimate, since copying is protected, or does the GPL allow the owner of a copy of a GPL'd work or its copyright holder to forbid me from copying it? I suppose that this might be germaine to discussions of Ada, given the sometimes long lags between private and public releases of some GPL Ada tools. Al ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-19 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians @ 1998-11-20 0:00 ` dennison 1998-11-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3654CC2B.63DD8D5D@easystreet.com>, Al Christians <achrist@easystreet.com> wrote: > Here's something that I don't understand about the GPL: Does it allow > any restrictions on copying of GPL'd works? Are any means by which I > come into possession of a copy of GPL'd work legitimate, since copying > is protected, or does the GPL allow the owner of a copy of a GPL'd > work or its copyright holder to forbid me from copying it? I suppose > that this might be germaine to discussions of Ada, given the sometimes > long lags between private and public releases of some GPL Ada tools. Read the GPL yourself. From my reading, that would seem to be the case. However, many methods of "acquiring" GPL'ed code might bring you into conflict with your local and national penal codes. :-) Lets give an example: Suppose we have a company named BDU who maintains a really nifty GPL GUI builder. They continually make improvements, but only publicly release these improvements at the pitifully slow rate of once a year. Now suppose a crook who we will call CJ breaks into the offices of BDU and copies the latest version of the GUI builder onto a floppy. CJ is clearly guilty of breaking and entering. But does the GPL make it illegal for him to possess that copy of the BDU GUI builder? Does the GPL make it illegal for him to disseminate copies of the stolen version of the GUI builder from his prison cell PC? No, and no. How about civil court? Now let's suppose that BDU actually uses their pitifuly slow release schedule to make themselves money. They give out intermediate versions of their GUI builder to customers who pay BDU for "support". Now word gets around on usenet about where to get CJ's stolen intermediate version, and BDU looses half their "support" customers. Can they sue CJ for the lost income? Yes, you can always sue someone. But does the GPL protect CJ in court from this charge? That's a bit foggy. The answer probably depends on the relative quality of their laywers. :-) -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison @ 1998-11-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 1998-11-23 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-11-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <734eo8$41v$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes: >Lets give an example: Suppose we have a company named BDU who maintains a >really nifty GPL GUI builder. They continually make improvements, but only >publicly release these improvements at the pitifully slow rate of once a >year. Now suppose a crook who we will call CJ breaks into the offices of BDU >and copies the latest version of the GUI builder onto a floppy. > >CJ is clearly guilty of breaking and entering. But does the GPL make it >illegal for him to possess that copy of the BDU GUI builder? Does the GPL >make it illegal for him to disseminate copies of the stolen version of the >GUI builder from his prison cell PC? No, and no. I'd agree the GPL doesn't make illegal, but I'd be very concerned about a criminal charge of "possession of stolen property" against anybody who knowingly accepted such material since it *was* stolen and is a licenced and copyrighted work. >How about civil court? Now let's suppose that BDU actually uses their >pitifuly slow release schedule to make themselves money. They give out >intermediate versions of their GUI builder to customers who pay BDU for >"support". Now word gets around on usenet about where to get CJ's stolen >intermediate version, and BDU looses half their "support" customers. Can they >sue CJ for the lost income? >Yes, you can always sue someone. But does the GPL protect CJ in court from >this charge? That's a bit foggy. The answer probably depends on the relative >quality of their laywers. :-) Perhaps, but I'd say that in the hypothetical you give, BDU would have no claim because they *are* distributing it to their customers who have no legal prohibition against redistributing it. The fact that it happened to have been distributed due to a theft was incidental: BDU took no "precautions" (and under the GPL indeed could taken none: that's the whole point) against redistribution and thus would have no claim. Note the parenthetical part of the above sentence is also a major issue. By putting "support" in quotes above, you imply a situation where the primary value being provided by BDU to its customers is access to the latest version, not some actual service being provided (and you confirm this by hypothesizing that half the customers would be lost if a copy got out on the net). But this is not a practical scenario because any of BDU's customers could themselves offer the "support" at a lower price. So the entire business model you hypothesize is impossible in the first place. However, we can look at a similar hypothetical, where BDU hadn't released the software *to anybody* because it wasn't finished yet. Now suppose CJ distributes *this* version, the origin of it gets muddled on the net, and the reputation of BDU becomes one of a company that has badly broken software, due to this software being available. In that case, I *do* think that CJ would be liable for such damages because BDU certainly took precautions to prevent that buggy version from getting out. However, the possibility of somebody in prison for breaking and entering actually being able to *pay* such damages is low enough that this entire scenario is vanishingly unlikely. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner @ 1998-11-23 0:00 ` dennison 1998-11-23 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-23 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <73633i$aqs$1@news.nyu.edu>, kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) wrote: > In article <734eo8$41v$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes: > >Lets give an example: Suppose we have a company named BDU who maintains a > >really nifty GPL GUI builder. They continually make improvements, but only > >publicly release these improvements at the pitifully slow rate of once a > >year. Now suppose a crook who we will call CJ breaks into the offices of BDU > >and copies the latest version of the GUI builder onto a floppy. > > > >CJ is clearly guilty of breaking and entering. But does the GPL make it > >illegal for him to possess that copy of the BDU GUI builder? Does the GPL > >make it illegal for him to disseminate copies of the stolen version of the > >GUI builder from his prison cell PC? No, and no. > > I'd agree the GPL doesn't make illegal, but I'd be very concerned > about a criminal charge of "possession of stolen property" against > anybody who knowingly accepted such material since it *was* stolen and > is a licenced and copyrighted work. I don't think that would be a problem. BDU was deprived of no physical resource, and CJ was meerly copying the software from their hard-drives in accordance with the software license. By the terms of the license, copying it from their hard-drives is no different from copying it from their web server. Perhaps the electrons on CJ's floppy were stolen from BDU's hard drives, but it would be awfully tough to prove anyone further down the line recieved those same stolen electrons from the BDU hard-drive. -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-23 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison @ 1998-11-23 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 0 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-11-23 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <73c3so$rsi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes: >In article <73633i$aqs$1@news.nyu.edu>, > kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) wrote: >> I'd agree the GPL doesn't make illegal, but I'd be very concerned >> about a criminal charge of "possession of stolen property" against >> anybody who knowingly accepted such material since it *was* stolen and >> is a licenced and copyrighted work. > >I don't think that would be a problem. BDU was deprived of no physical >resource, and CJ was meerly copying the software from their hard-drives in >accordance with the software license. By the terms of the license, copying it >from their hard-drives is no different from copying it from their web server. Most jurisdiction have the concept of stealing data, so it doesn't have to be a physical object to be "stolen property". And the fact that a legitimate possessor of the data is permitted to copy it isn't relevant to CJ. >Perhaps the electrons on CJ's floppy were stolen from BDU's hard drives, but >it would be awfully tough to prove anyone further down the line recieved >those same stolen electrons from the BDU hard-drive. Well, proof is indeed a possible problem, but could be gotten around in various ways. For example, CJ might testify against all those he sold copies to in exchange for a reduced sentence. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-19 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison @ 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-11-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3654CC2B.63DD8D5D@easystreet.com> Al Christians <achrist@easystreet.com> writes: >Richard Kenner wrote: >> Depends on what you mean by "private". The GPL only imposes >> limitations on what restrictions you can impose on copies of software >> you choose to distribute, but it does not (and cannot) create any >> obligation to distribute the software at all or to any specific person >> or group of people. > >The GPL or some of the explanatory materials that were distributed with >it points out that there may be some conflicts between the GPL and other >contractual arrangements with other parties that bind particular users of >GPL'd items. The GPL does not bend on account of those arrangements, and >it's up to the user of the GPL'd items to act according to the GPL or to >refrain from using the GPL'd items. That's true, but is totally irrelevant to above issue. >If a GPL'd item or a derivative of a GPL'd item is created in a way that >some other conflicting license or contract also applies, then whoever >tried to satisfy both arrangements probably made a mistake. Of course, >with something like Win32 bindings, the existence of a conflicting >requirement would only be determined by direct contact with the >attorneys of MS, something we wouldn't wish on anyone, so the area is perhaps >inherently murky. I also don't follow this, since the Win32 bindings are not GPL'd. They are distributed along with GNAT on NT, but, as the GPL says, In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License. >Here's something that I don't understand about the GPL: Does it allow >any restrictions on copying of GPL'd works? Only those specifically allowed by the GPL, which is that the copied work must have precisely the same GPL restrictions on it. >Are any means by which I come into possession of a copy of GPL'd work >legitimate, Not necessarily, since there is the possibility of a restriction by a third party unknown to the original author or person who made the copy. This gets into a very gray area of the GPL. The kind of thing I'm talking about is a government deciding that some GPL'd encryption software is "too secure" and forbidding export or a determination that a patent of some third party has been infringed. Paragraph 7 of the GPL makes it clear that if somebody is aware of these restrictions, they are not permitted to distribute the software at all, but if they don't know about them you can easily have the sort of situation you asked about: where a copy is made but that copy is not legitimate. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-19 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians @ 1998-11-20 0:00 ` dennison 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dennison @ 1998-11-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <732be5$dd3$1@news.nyu.edu>, kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) wrote: > In article <72pcj5$eg6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> dennison@telepath.com writes: > >Yes, but wouldn't the GPL have "something to say"? My understanding is that > >GPL'ed software cannot be taken private, or bestowed with private components. > > Depends on what you mean by "private". The GPL only imposes > limitations on what restrictions you can impose on copies of software > you choose to distribute, but it does not (and cannot) create any > obligation to distribute the software at all or to any specific person > or group of people. > Yes. I suppose the choice of that word was unfortunate. By "private" I meant redistributed with souce unvailable and/or a restrictive commercial-type license. Obviously you can refuse to give someone your source if you also refuse to give them your binaries. -- T.E.D. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1998-11-13 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dale Stanbrough 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar @ 1998-11-14 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar 3 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com>, dpw@cts.com wrote: > More specifically, distribution requires the licensee to > also license the Microsoft SDK, which is why we are able > to bundle it with ObjectAda. The version that is generally available contains no such permission. It requires that USE of the binding require that you also use the SDK, but at least the version I have access to says nothing about such distribution permission. Can one assume that this is a special deal that Aonix specifically made with Microsoft, or are you just assuming that it is OK to distribute if you are sure users will be properly licensed to use the bindings. On the face of it the copyright is exactly that, a copyright that prohibits copying. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Dave Wood 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Dave Wood @ 1998-11-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > In article <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com>, > dpw@cts.com wrote: > > > More specifically, distribution requires the licensee to > > also license the Microsoft SDK, which is why we are able > > to bundle it with ObjectAda. > > The version that is generally available contains no such > permission. It requires that USE of the binding require > that you also use the SDK, but at least the version I have > access to says nothing about such distribution permission. > Can one assume that this is a special deal that Aonix > specifically made with Microsoft, or are you just assuming > that it is OK to distribute if you are sure users will be > properly licensed to use the bindings. On the face of it > the copyright is exactly that, a copyright that prohibits > copying. Yes, we have the necessary licensing arrangements in place. -- Dave Wood, Aonix -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows -- http://www.aonix.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood @ 1998-11-15 0:00 ` dewarr 0 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <364E9C4A.E6F28A9F@cts.com>, dpw@cts.com wrote: > Yes, we have the necessary licensing arrangements > in place. > > -- Dave Wood, Aonix > -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows > -- http://www.aonix.com The trouble is that this distribution and licensing does not solve the problem, which is that these bindings are hopelessly out of date, they cover only version 3.5, and they also contain a number of errors. If we don't have a freely distributable version which people can contribute fixes and improvements to, then it is unlikely that any one company will invest the necessary effort to bring these bindings up to date. Aonix has gone the route of providing a proprietary binding to solve this problem, but that is hardly satsifactory in terms of the original goals of the project. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-14 0:00 ` dewar 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Tom Moran 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 3 siblings, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: dewar @ 1998-11-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com>, dpw@cts.com wrote: > The curious thing is how this happened in the first place > If I understand the history correctly, Intermetrics made > the bindings through direct government funding, so how > did we get into a situation where taxpayers paid for > this, as they did GNAT, and yet have to get Bill's > permission to use it? There must be some interesting > story there somewhere. By the way, the total amount of government money spent on GNAT is far less than has been spent on other Ada technologies that the government has directly and indirectly funded, and most of those stay *completely* proprietary. I don't think the fact that tax payers pay for something has much to do with the tax payers getting free use! I also note that at this stage, even excluding the gcc back end, and looking just at the Ada 95 component, the total government funding on GNAT accounts for only a small fraction (less than half) of the development cost of GNAT. The remainder of the development costs have been funded directly by Ada Core Technologies, which continues to make substantial investments in continued development of GNAT and related technologies. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar @ 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Tom Moran 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Tom Moran @ 1998-11-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) >technologies that the government has directly and >indirectly funded, and most of those stay *completely* >proprietary I understand there was some wording in a recent bill that allows Freedom of Information Act access to university research etc that used to be disclosed only by the investigator or the granting agency. Anbody know how that might affect software development in the future? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Tom Moran @ 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Dave Wood 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1 sibling, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Dave Wood @ 1998-11-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) dewar@gnat.com wrote: > > In article <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com>, > dpw@cts.com wrote: > > The curious thing is how this happened in the first place > > If I understand the history correctly, Intermetrics made > > the bindings through direct government funding, so how > > did we get into a situation where taxpayers paid for > > this, as they did GNAT, and yet have to get Bill's > > permission to use it? There must be some interesting > > story there somewhere. [Needless to say, nothing derogatory was intended here - I was talking about the original GNAT investment, not whatever proprietary follow-on has gone on since by ACT or anyone else. By contrast, to my knowledge Win32Ada was 100% taxpayer funded, and IMHO ought to be a public resource. Allowing rights to an uninvolved 3rd party (Microsoft), seems completely nutty to me.] > By the way, the total amount of government money spent on > GNAT is far less than has been spent on other Ada > technologies that the government has directly and > indirectly funded, and most of those stay *completely* > proprietary. I don't think the fact that tax payers pay > for something has much to do with the tax payers getting > free use! I don't want to get into a protracted discussion on this since I have no special expertise in it and you are doubtless one of the top-ranking experts, but my gut instinct is that if something is 100% funded by tax dollars, it ought to be 100% in the control of the taxpayers or of their elected representatives, at least if the creator of the product has no intention to support and evolve it. I can see that an exception might be a flat-out grant where a priori there are no strings attached, such as for basic research. I'm reminded of ALS, a big fat waste of tax money if ever there was one (and how many of us had at least some peripheral involvement with THAT mess?) If I remember correctly, the government retained control of the resulting software and made it available on mag tape for something like $25, more or less cost of materials and shipping/handling. Or, well, maybe I'm wrong. -- Dave Wood, Aonix -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows -- http://www.aonix.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood @ 1998-11-15 0:00 ` dewarr 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Andi Kleen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: dewarr @ 1998-11-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <364EA0F6.A66B888F@cts.com>, dpw@cts.com wrote: > dewar@gnat.com wrote: > > [Needless to say, nothing derogatory was intended > here - I was talking about the original GNAT > investment, not whatever proprietary follow-on > has gone on since by ACT or anyone else. By contrast, > to my knowledge Win32Ada was 100% taxpayer funded, and > IMHO ought to be a public resource. Allowing rights > to an uninvolved 3rd party (Microsoft), seems completely > nutty to me.] > The government often funds under agrements that will leave entire proprietary rights in the hands of companies. Indeed my understanding is that the academic edition of Object Ada, in which the taxpayers invested directly more than half what it spent on GNAT, is in this category. That is by no means unusual, and by no means necessarily inappropriate. It really depends on what the government hoped to achieve. In the case of GNAT, it was of the essence in terms of the governments interest (to make a freely available high quality Ada 95 compiler available for academic use) to insist on the GPL licensing of the initial version (and that the copyrights be assigned to the FSF). In the case of the compiler work funded later as the academic Ada compiler project, the government made a specific decision that there was no requirement that it should be freely distributed in OSS form. I think what happened in the Intermetrics bindings cases was that the government DID intend that the resulting bindings be freely available, but clearly did not properly write this into the contract as they did with GNAT. The GNAT contract is quite remarkable in that it includes the entire text of the GPL, and very specifically required the use of the GPL, and the assignment of the copyright to the Free Software Foundation. This was in my view a significant error in the contractual instruments for this work. The other major oversight was the failure to provide for continued maintenance. We are now investigating the possibility of a clean room implementation of a thin binding to Win32 that will once and for all clear up this unfortunate confusion. This is incidentally exactly the sort of project that one would hope can be successfully achieved using the OSS model. The copyright on the Win32 bindings is particularly unfortunate from this point of view, since it is one thing for companies like Aonix and ACT to work out how they can distribute the Win32 bindings in their current copyrighted form, and quite another for volunteers to distribute modified and corrected and improved versions. By the way, I certainly did not take anything Dave said as derogatory, I just wanted to make the GNAT funding situation clear. We still run into people who think that the government is directly supporting GNAT, a situation that of course has not been true for four years. We did not even seek such continued funding after the initial contract ended, since we felt that the commercial support model was more appropriate. There is no doubt that there could not have been a GNAT without the government's initial funding (indeed even with that funding, the fate of GNAT was in the balance a few times when the project was severely attacked by some existing Ada vendors). I think it is quite a reasonable model for the government to provide initial funding of this type, especially if the result is a freely available product. I do NOT think it is healthy for the government to continue to provide such funding. The future of GNAT depends on our ability to improve the product and compete directly with the other Ada 95 vendors. This competition is an important factor in the continued development and improvement of GNAT (not to mention the continued development and improvement of other vendors products!) > I don't want to get into a protracted discussion > on this since I have no special expertise in it > and you are doubtless one of the top-ranking > experts, but my gut instinct is that if something > is 100% funded by tax dollars, it ought to be 100% > in the control of the taxpayers or of their elected > representatives, at least if the creator of the > product has no intention to support and evolve it. > I can see that an exception might be a flat-out > grant where a priori there are no strings attached, > such as for basic research. I don't think that's right. If the government funds something at a 100% level, they have a choice as to who ends up with the data rights. Clearly they will have to spend more if they want the data rights to be freely available to the public. Whether this is a good idea (to spend this additional money) depends on the project. The ATIP projects funded a few years ago, quite deliberately allowed the data rights to remain with the vendors, and most of these products remain proprietary (but not all, for example the GNAT version for the MAC was distributed freely, and is still freely available) > I'm reminded of ALS, a big fat waste of tax money if > ever there was one (and how many of us had at least > some peripheral involvement with THAT mess?) If I > remember correctly, the government retained control > of the resulting software and made it available on > mag tape for something like $25, more or less cost > of materials and shipping/handling. ALS cost the government a LOT of money, something of the order of 15-20 times the cost of GNAT. Interestingly there was much less hue and cry from the other vendors, I think simply because ALS was seen as a technical failure, and was never successful in the market place. Part of the reason for some of the vendors strongly opposing the GNAT project was their prediction (accurate we believe :-) that GNAT would be of sufficient quality to seriously compete with their products. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr @ 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Andi Kleen 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 0 siblings, 1 reply; 50+ messages in thread From: Andi Kleen @ 1998-11-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <72mlq3$9nd$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com writes: > ALS cost the government a LOT of money, something of the > order of 15-20 times the cost of GNAT. Interestingly there > was much less hue and cry from the other vendors, I think > simply because ALS was seen as a technical failure, and was > never successful in the market place. Part of the reason > for some of the vendors strongly opposing the GNAT project > was their prediction (accurate we believe :-) that GNAT > would be of sufficient quality to seriously compete with > their products. Sorry for a stupid question, but.. What exactly is ALS ? -Andi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: Win32Ada 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Andi Kleen @ 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Al Christians 0 siblings, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Al Christians @ 1998-11-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Andi Kleen wrote: > > Sorry for a stupid question, but.. > > What exactly is ALS ? > In the spirit of all the replies to "... ADA?" Lou Gehrig's Disease or Advanced Logistics System. Al ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* win32ada @ 2003-07-17 4:34 Aaron W. Myers 2003-07-17 8:51 ` win32ada Jerry van Dijk 2003-07-18 3:21 ` win32ada Steve 0 siblings, 2 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Aaron W. Myers @ 2003-07-17 4:34 UTC (permalink / raw) Thanks for reading. I'm trying to build the win32ada examples and I always get an error that says something a lot the lines: gcc -c connect.adb connect.adb:8:06: file "win32.ads" not found connect.adb:8:06: "Connect (body)" depends on "Connectpkg (spec)" connect.adb:8:06: "Connectpkg (spec)" depends on "Win32 (spec)" compilation abandoned it's really frustrating! I've tried installing win32ada several times. i'm using the one i suppose was made during the time of gnat 3.08 (i haven't been able to find a new one) and i'm using gnat 3.14. When i'm running that last command, gnatmake withall all goes well until i get one of these pretty ones. ./win32-windowsx.o(.text+0xa009):win32-windowsx: undefined reference to `SendMes sageA@16' ./win32-windowsx.o(.text+0xa0aa):win32-windowsx: more undefined references to `S endMessageA@16' follow gnatlink: cannot call C:\GNAT\bin\gcc.exe gnatmake: *** link failed. hmmmmmmmmmmmm . . . so what do y'all think? should i try gwindows? Sincerely, Aaron W. Myers ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: win32ada 2003-07-17 4:34 win32ada Aaron W. Myers @ 2003-07-17 8:51 ` Jerry van Dijk 2003-07-18 3:21 ` win32ada Steve 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Jerry van Dijk @ 2003-07-17 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw) awm917@truman.edu (Aaron W. Myers) writes: > times. i'm using the one i suppose was made during the time of gnat > 3.08 (i haven't been able to find a new one) and i'm using gnat 3.14. That definitively is not going to work. Use the win32ada binding that goes with the GNAT version you are using. It is in gnatwin-3.14p.exe. You might consider upgrading to 3.15p. > ./win32-windowsx.o(.text+0xa009):win32-windowsx: undefined reference > to `SendMes > sageA@16' > ./win32-windowsx.o(.text+0xa0aa):win32-windowsx: more undefined > references to `S > endMessageA@16' follow > gnatlink: cannot call C:\GNAT\bin\gcc.exe > gnatmake: *** link failed. GNAT cannot find the windows libraries. > hmmmmmmmmmmmm . . . so what do y'all think? should i try gwindows? Yes, but not to solve this problem :-) -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jvandyk@attglobal.net -- Leiden, Holland | web: users.ncrvnet.nl/gmvdijk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
* Re: win32ada 2003-07-17 4:34 win32ada Aaron W. Myers 2003-07-17 8:51 ` win32ada Jerry van Dijk @ 2003-07-18 3:21 ` Steve 1 sibling, 0 replies; 50+ messages in thread From: Steve @ 2003-07-18 3:21 UTC (permalink / raw) First make sure you have everything you need. You can get gnat and the win32 support via anoymous ftp from: cs.nyu.edu in the directory: /pub/gnat/3.15p/winnt You'll need to install both: gnat-3.15p-nt.exe and gnatwin-3.15p.exe Things have always worked for me after going through this process. If you have done this much and things still aren't working, ask again. Steve (The Duck) "Aaron W. Myers" <awm917@truman.edu> wrote in message news:e2c0e503.0307162034.34a6abfc@posting.google.com... > Thanks for reading. > > I'm trying to build the win32ada examples and I always get an error > that says something a lot the lines: > > gcc -c connect.adb > connect.adb:8:06: file "win32.ads" not found > connect.adb:8:06: "Connect (body)" depends on "Connectpkg (spec)" > connect.adb:8:06: "Connectpkg (spec)" depends on "Win32 (spec)" > compilation abandoned > > it's really frustrating! I've tried installing win32ada several > times. i'm using the one i suppose was made during the time of gnat > 3.08 (i haven't been able to find a new one) and i'm using gnat 3.14. > When i'm running that last command, gnatmake withall all goes well > until i get one of these pretty ones. > > ./win32-windowsx.o(.text+0xa009):win32-windowsx: undefined reference > to `SendMes > sageA@16' > ./win32-windowsx.o(.text+0xa0aa):win32-windowsx: more undefined > references to `S > endMessageA@16' follow > gnatlink: cannot call C:\GNAT\bin\gcc.exe > gnatmake: *** link failed. > hmmmmmmmmmmmm . . . so what do y'all think? should i try gwindows? > > Sincerely, > Aaron W. Myers ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 50+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-07-18 3:21 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 50+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1996-03-21 0:00 Win32Ada Pascal OBRY 1996-03-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Robert F. Estes 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Win32Ada Carl J R Johansson 1996-03-28 0:00 ` Win32Ada Ted Dennison [not found] ` <4jf4uhINNsad@RA.DEPT.CS.YALE.EDU> 1996-03-29 0:00 ` Win32Ada Ted Dennison 1996-03-29 0:00 ` Win32Ada lrharris 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Win32Ada Wiljan Derks 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Renaming record discriminants Felaco 1996-04-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft 1996-04-01 0:00 ` David Weller 1996-04-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 1998-11-11 0:00 Win32Ada BARDIN Marc 1998-11-11 0:00 ` Win32Ada Henri 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-12 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1998-11-13 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dale Stanbrough 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Jerry van Dijk 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada Larry Kilgallen 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-18 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-16 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-17 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-19 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-21 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-23 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-23 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada Richard Kenner 1998-11-20 0:00 ` Win32Ada dennison 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewar 1998-11-14 0:00 ` Win32Ada Tom Moran 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Dave Wood 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada dewarr 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Andi Kleen 1998-11-15 0:00 ` Win32Ada Al Christians 2003-07-17 4:34 win32ada Aaron W. Myers 2003-07-17 8:51 ` win32ada Jerry van Dijk 2003-07-18 3:21 ` win32ada Steve
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox