From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3debd0b7ab930abc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: John Lindsay <lindsay_j@rmc.ca>
Subject: Re: Ada 95 - the interpretation of the Gnu 'copy left'
Date: 1997/10/29
Message-ID: <3457601A.21D8@rmc.ca>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 285803318
References: <19971020164100.MAA21408@ladder02.news.aol.com>
 <344BAAB5.21E5@rmc.ca> <x7vu3ebj570.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>
 <dewar.878102384@merv>
Reply-To: lindsay_j@rmc.ca
To: Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu>
Organization: Royal Military College
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-10-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> John Lindsay <lindsay_j@rmc.ca> writes re GNAT:
> 
> >                  This is one of the Gnu compilers, utilities,
> > etc., is free to use, and the source code is available.
> > But its covered by the Free Software Foundation's famous
> > 'copy left' (as opposed to copyright), and one can't use it
> > for profit without further arrangements;
> 
> I find it a bit surprising that John would be confused in this way. This
> is of course quite incorrect. Anyone can use GNAT to build any kind of
> programs at all, proprietary, classified etc. There are no restrictions
> of any kind placed on programs generated by GNAT, and the runtime is
> explicitly licensed in a manner that ensures that no restrictions are
> engendered by the use of this runtime.
> 
> Robert Dewar
> Ada Core Technologies

Well, this is good; thanks to Robert and one other who 
corrected my understanding.  But I read a copy of the 
'copy left' some time ago with exactly this question and 
a related question - can the Gnu compilers &c. be used to 
create software to be distributed at all without also 
distributing the whole particular Gnu package used to 
create it - in mind.  My understanding (incorrect - separate 
arrangements needed to use for profit, correct - no need to 
redistribute the whole thing) came from that reading.  
The copy left is verbose, perhaps necessarily so, and 
perhaps it has been reworked since I read it.  I wonder if 
a short 1-paragraph plain English explanation is needed to 
accompany it, not in any way replacing or modifying the 
full 'legal' text.

-- 
All the best !

John H. Lindsay, Assistant Professor,
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER SCIENCE
ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE OF CANADA
PO BOX 17000  STN FORCES
KINGSTON   ON   K7K7B4   CANADA

e-mail:              Lindsay_J@RMC.CA
Phone:               (613) 541-5010-6419
Fax:                 (613) 542-8129