* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
[not found] <9502031233.AA09688@grue.sware.com.sware.com>
@ 1995-02-07 10:49 ` Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1995-02-07 10:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <9502031233.AA09688@grue.sware.com.sware.com> Dennis Doubleday <dday@SWARE.COM> writes:
>LPF has done no such thing. They have simply exercised their right not to
>support such a port.
To be more precise, the FSF does not "support" (in the usual meaning
of that term) *any* software whatsoever. Yes, they set up addresses
for reporting bugs and try to develop fixes, but actual *support* for
GNU software is provided by commercial organizations. Cygnus is the
best known, but see the file SUPPORT in any FSF distribution for a
full list.
The LPF boycott of Apple had precisely two effects on GCC/GNAT for Mac:
1) The FSF would not distribute such a port, nor allow any of its
resources (including the gnu newsgroups and mailing lists) to be used
for the effort of such a port.
2) The FSF would not assist in the development of such a port and the
LPF encouraged its members to do likewise.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
@ 1995-02-07 15:54 CONDIC
1995-02-07 20:18 ` Rich Hilliard
1995-02-07 22:55 ` Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: CONDIC @ 1995-02-07 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
From: Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
Subject: Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
Original_To: PROFS%"SMTP@PWAGPDB"
Original_cc: CONDIC
Robert Dewar <dewar@CS.NYU.EDU> Writes:
>
>No, the next milestone is now, as it has been before the recent announcement,
>when a version of gcc becomes available for the Mac. Remember that FSF itself
>is not particularly interested in the MAC, until there is a version of GNU
>(the operating system) for the MAC. They are not in the business of creating
>ports to miscellaneous non-GNU operating systems.
>...Etc...
>
O.K. I'm a little lost. I've been reading this thread over the
last couple of days and could use a little history.
1) Is/was there some sort of boycott by FSF of Apple/Macintosh
machines?
2) For what reason?
3) Did it have any impact?
4) If the boycott is over, how did this come about? (Is there
some sort of secret cabal running FSF who went into a smoke
filled room, made a decision and pronounced it to the world?)
5) Is there any immediate impact for the Mac world or FSF world?
Sorry if I'm asking questions that should be intuitively obvious
to even the most casual observer. Ignorance isn't a crime -
remaining so intentionally ought to be...
Pax,
Marin
Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer ATT: 407.796.8997
M/S 731-93 Technet: 796.8997
Pratt & Whitney, GESP Internet: CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
P.O. Box 109600 Internet: MDCONDIC@AOL.COM
West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600
===============================================================================
"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked
with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is
a fad that won't last out the year."
-- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice
Hall, 1957.
===============================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
1995-02-07 15:54 CONDIC
@ 1995-02-07 20:18 ` Rich Hilliard
1995-02-07 22:55 ` Richard Kenner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Rich Hilliard @ 1995-02-07 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
[ I normally prefer making email responses to news postings, but the
poster's address bounced, so I'm posting here. ]
In article <INFO-ADA%95020709583652@VM1.NODAK.EDU>
CONDIC@PSAVAX.PWFL.COM writes:
> O.K. I'm a little lost. I've been reading this thread over the last
> couple of days and could use a little history.
OK, some quick history (for more, see the URL in my signature):
In 1989, Apple's look and feel lawsuit against Microsoft brought the
idea of interface copyright to the attention of the programming
community. Apple was trying to claim a monopoly over a broad class
of graphical user interfaces. If Apple succeeded, not only
Microsoft, but every software developer, would be legally compelled
to design gratuitously incompatible software.
In response, John Gilmore and Richard Stallman together commissioned
the design of the "fanged Apple" -- a button showing the Apple logo
with vicious teeth. This was followed by an advertisement placed in
The Tech, MIT's student newspaper, which in turn led to a protest
rally at the HQ of Lotus Development Corporation--another "look and
feel" lawsuit plaintiff.
The enthusiastic response to the first protest led to the formation
of the League for Programming Freedom in late 1989.
The general aim of the League for Programming Freedom is to prevent
monopolies on software development. Initially the League's only
specific position was against interface copyright. But once the
League began to operate, members called its attention to the problem
of software patents. In December 1990 [check this date], the League
members voted to adopt a position opposing software patents.
> 1) Is/was there some sort of boycott by FSF of Apple/Macintosh
> machines?
The LPF was the group that initiated the boycott, not FSF. Free
Software Foundation (no relation to the LPF) recognised the LPF's
boycott.
> 2) For what reason?
See above. Also see Kenner's earlier note in this thread which quite
eloquently stated why Apple's actions are a real threat to free
software.
But it's worth pointing out the LPF has no position on free software;
only on the two issues of software patents and user interface
copyrights. There are consequently a number of corporate members of
LPF who share its goals on these matters.
> 3) Did it have any impact?
Debatable.
> 4) If the boycott is over, how did this come about? (Is there some
> sort of secret cabal running FSF who went into a smoke filled room,
> made a decision and pronounced it to the world?)
The board of directors of the *LPF* voted to end it last Fall;
determining to fight software patents and look and feel issues in
other ways (court actions, public awareness).
> 5) Is there any immediate impact for the Mac world or FSF world?
Threads like this one. :-)
--
Rich Hilliard
The MITRE Corporation, M/S B155
Bedford, MA 01730
(617) 271-5782
I'm a member of the League for Programming Freedom
lpf@uunet.uu.net
http://www.lpf.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
1995-02-07 15:54 CONDIC
1995-02-07 20:18 ` Rich Hilliard
@ 1995-02-07 22:55 ` Richard Kenner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1995-02-07 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <INFO-ADA%95020709583652@VM1.NODAK.EDU> CONDIC@PSAVAX.PWFL.COM writes:
>1) Is/was there some sort of boycott by FSF of Apple/Macintosh
>machines?
There was a boycott of Apple by the LPF. The FSF supported this
boycott.
>2) For what reason?
Because Apple tried to take away the freedom of people to write
free software.
>3) Did it have any impact?
No way to know.
>4) If the boycott is over, how did this come about? (Is there
>some sort of secret cabal running FSF who went into a smoke
>filled room, made a decision and pronounced it to the world?)
The LPF decided to discontinue the boycott based on their analysis
of the behavior of Apple and other companies and the legal and
practical issues involved. I don't know if the LPF has given any
official statement.
>5) Is there any immediate impact for the Mac world or FSF world?
Probably not.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
@ 1995-02-01 12:42 David Weller
1995-02-02 0:21 ` Michael Hirasuna
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: David Weller @ 1995-02-01 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
This has probably been mentioned before, but if not...
In this month's GNU's Bulletin, an atricle indicated the League of
Programming Freedom (LPF) has dropped its boycott of Apple. The Free
Software Foundation (FSF), which was backing the LPF, has also
announced it will no longer boycott Apple. This means "the FSF will
now treat Apple operating systems like other non-free operating
systems."
This is, of course, welcome news by all. For the Ada community, however,
it speaks volumes.
--
Frustrated with C, C++, Pascal, Fortran? Ada95 _might_ be for you!
For all sorts of interesting Ada95 tidbits, run the command:
"finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
1995-02-01 12:42 David Weller
@ 1995-02-02 0:21 ` Michael Hirasuna
1995-02-02 1:45 ` Richard Kenner
[not found] ` <3gr7ql$39u@rational.rational.com>
1995-02-06 4:46 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
[not found] ` <3grq8l$jja@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Michael Hirasuna @ 1995-02-02 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <3gnviq$epn@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>, dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM
(David Weller) wrote:
> This has probably been mentioned before, but if not...
>
> In this month's GNU's Bulletin, an atricle indicated the League of
> Programming Freedom (LPF) has dropped its boycott of Apple. The Free
> Software Foundation (FSF), which was backing the LPF, has also
> announced it will no longer boycott Apple. This means "the FSF will
> now treat Apple operating systems like other non-free operating
> systems."
I didn't know, this is wonderful news, thanks for the posting.
What caused this change of heart? How can I get a copy of the bulletin?
I guess the next milestone is when an FSF version of gcc becomes available
for the Mac.
--
Michael Hirasuna | hirasuna@acm.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
1995-02-02 0:21 ` Michael Hirasuna
@ 1995-02-02 1:45 ` Richard Kenner
[not found] ` <hirasuna-0402950942330001@hirasuna.clark.net>
[not found] ` <3gr7ql$39u@rational.rational.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1995-02-02 1:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <hirasuna-0102951921230001@hirasuna.clark.net> hirasuna@acm.org (Michael Hirasuna) writes:
>I guess the next milestone is when an FSF version of gcc becomes available
>for the Mac.
I think you mean when the FSF GCC distribution supports the Mac. This
will happen as soon as somebody sends me the necessary files.
The FSF itself does not do ports to other than GNU, but essentially
serves as a clearinghouse for the work of those who have done such
ports.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <3gr7ql$39u@rational.rational.com>]
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
[not found] ` <3gr7ql$39u@rational.rational.com>
@ 1995-02-07 10:32 ` Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1995-02-07 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <3gr7ql$39u@rational.rational.com> rlk@rational.com (Bob Kitzberger) writes:
>Am I the only one that finds it ironic that a group calling itself
>the League of Programming Freedom has prevented gcc from being ported
>to the Mac?
You misrepresent the record here. The FSF cannot prevent GCC from
being ported to any machine, since it is under the GPL and it did not
prevent such a port from being performed.
However, the FSF did not assist in such port, either before or
after the fact, though there was certainly such a port.
The reason for this is that if Apple had been successful in their
legal action, people would no longer have the freedom to write
programs such as GCC.
It would have been hypocritical of the FSF to support a company
whose aims were to prevent the FSF and other similar groups from
producing free software.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
1995-02-01 12:42 David Weller
1995-02-02 0:21 ` Michael Hirasuna
@ 1995-02-06 4:46 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-07 3:03 ` Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <3grq8l$jja@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software @ 1995-02-06 4:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <3gnviq$epn@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>, dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (David Weller) writes:
> This has probably been mentioned before, but if not...
>
> In this month's GNU's Bulletin, an atricle indicated the League of
> Programming Freedom (LPF) has dropped its boycott of Apple. The Free
> Software Foundation (FSF), which was backing the LPF, has also
> announced it will no longer boycott Apple. This means "the FSF will
> now treat Apple operating systems like other non-free operating
> systems."
>
> This is, of course, welcome news by all. For the Ada community, however,
> it speaks volumes.
I am not sure what volumes it speaks. Could someone elaborate ?
Does this mean that GNAT authors would just make a version of their compiler?
Does this mean they would define packages for the (many) Macintosh toolboxes?
Does it mean they would reach a cooperative agreement with Apple for periodic
release of the latest Apple toolbox definitions as is done for the commercial
third parties who produce C, Pascal and Fortran compilers?
(Not that proper Ada bindings are as easy as those others, which are done
somewhat automatically.)
I work with computers for a living (rather than use computers to work
with Physics for a living or some such), and it has probably been 25 years
since I wrote a program which did not have to be tightly connected with
the operating system. As far as commercial products are concerned, it
is not feasible to achieve the "look and feel" expected by customers on
(Macintosh, Windows, VMS, Unix) machines without using a lot of operating
system specific calls.
And presuming I tempt a GNAT expert into responding, would GNAT likely
output both 68000 and PowerPC code, or would it require a Macro assembler,
which relegates it to what some view as the inferior MPW environment?
Larry Kilgallen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc.
1995-02-06 4:46 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
@ 1995-02-07 3:03 ` Robert Dewar
1995-02-07 14:06 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1995-02-07 3:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
Larry asks all sorts of questions about what GNAT would look like on a MAC.
Larry, why not do the port yourself, the ncessary code generators are there!
Then you can answer these questions to your own satisfaction :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc
1995-02-07 3:03 ` Robert Dewar
@ 1995-02-07 14:06 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-07 22:07 ` Richard Kenner
[not found] ` <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software @ 1995-02-07 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <3h6nud$gdb@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
> Larry asks all sorts of questions about what GNAT would look like on a MAC.
> Larry, why not do the port yourself, the ncessary code generators are there!
1) Lack of technical competence
2) I have to work for a living
> Then you can answer these questions to your own satisfaction :-)
Groucho Marx said "I would never join a club which allowed ME as a member."
Extend that to remarks about eating ones own cooking. :-)
********
But seriously, I am curious when you say the necessary code generators
are there. If GNAT is not presently on Macintosh, how is there a code
generator for 68K (or PowerPC, for that matter, since MacOS seems to be
the only consumer of those chips so far).
If it is not obvious, I have only used commercial compilers.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc
1995-02-07 14:06 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
@ 1995-02-07 22:07 ` Richard Kenner
1995-02-08 15:56 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-09 1:51 ` Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1995-02-07 22:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <1995Feb7.090613.9062@eisner> kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software) writes:
>But seriously, I am curious when you say the necessary code generators
>are there.
Because they are. Irrespective of WHY they were developed, the
question of whether or not they exist is not one open to debate. Go
look at a GCC distribution.
>If GNAT is not presently on Macintosh, how is there a code
>generator for 68K (or PowerPC, for that matter, since MacOS seems to be
>the only consumer of those chips so far).
The 68K was the CPU used in the Sun3, which was for quite a while the
major (indeed essentially only) workstation used in Universities and
many other places.
The PowerPC port was done since it is very similar to the POWER
architecture used by the RS/6000, which GCC has supported since its
inception.
Motorola and IBM have expressed interest in the PowerPC GCC port.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc
1995-02-07 22:07 ` Richard Kenner
@ 1995-02-08 15:56 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-09 1:51 ` Robert Dewar
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software @ 1995-02-08 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.NYU.EDU>, kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes:
> > But seriously, I am curious when you say the necessary code generators
> > are there.
>
> Because they are. Irrespective of WHY they were developed, the
> question of whether or not they exist is not one open to debate. Go
> look at a GCC distribution.
Well not all of us have that available, or a wideband connection to the
Internet, but I do thank you for going on to explain how the two code
generators arrived. Understanding the origins is sometimes as important
as understanding the facts.
> Motorola and IBM have expressed interest in the PowerPC GCC port.
Even in non-commercial endeavors, I would feel hard-pressed to compete
with Motorola and IBM :-).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc
1995-02-07 22:07 ` Richard Kenner
1995-02-08 15:56 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
@ 1995-02-09 1:51 ` Robert Dewar
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1995-02-09 1:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
The 68000 has been and still is VERY widely used outside Apple. It is an
important player in the embedded market, and a significant use of GCC for
the 68K is for such embedded products. Thinking that the 68K is Apple
only is very misleading. Other machines that use the 68K are the Amiga
(for which there is a GNAT port being worked on), and the Atari.
As for the power PC, it is just the way things worked out that Apple came
out with the first PPC machines, but IBM is of course expected to be a major
player in PPC based machines.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.nyu.edu>]
* Re: FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc
[not found] ` <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
@ 1995-02-09 21:52 ` Bradley Ross
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Bradley Ross @ 1995-02-09 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.nyu.edu>,
Richard Kenner <kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu> wrote:
>The 68K was the CPU used in the Sun3, which was for quite a while the
>major (indeed essentially only) workstation used in Universities and
>many other places.
>
The 68K CPU was used in a number of different workstations in addition
to the Sun 3 workstation. I believe it was also used on the Apollo
workstations in the past and is currently used on the Commodore Amiga.
Both GCC and GNAT have been ported to the Commodore Amiga, although
the reference for the GNAT port stated that the version they used
required an immense amount of memory to compile itself. Is the new
version more efficient in this regard?
>The PowerPC port was done since it is very similar to the POWER
>architecture used by the RS/6000, which GCC has supported since its
>inception.
>
>Motorola and IBM have expressed interest in the PowerPC GCC port.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <3grq8l$jja@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>]
end of thread, other threads:[~1995-02-11 13:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <9502031233.AA09688@grue.sware.com.sware.com>
1995-02-07 10:49 ` FSF drops Apple boycott, opens gate for GNAT, etc Richard Kenner
1995-02-07 15:54 CONDIC
1995-02-07 20:18 ` Rich Hilliard
1995-02-07 22:55 ` Richard Kenner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1995-02-01 12:42 David Weller
1995-02-02 0:21 ` Michael Hirasuna
1995-02-02 1:45 ` Richard Kenner
[not found] ` <hirasuna-0402950942330001@hirasuna.clark.net>
1995-02-07 11:11 ` Richard Kenner
[not found] ` <3gr7ql$39u@rational.rational.com>
1995-02-07 10:32 ` Richard Kenner
1995-02-06 4:46 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-07 3:03 ` Robert Dewar
1995-02-07 14:06 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-07 22:07 ` Richard Kenner
1995-02-08 15:56 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-02-09 1:51 ` Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <3h8qve$e02@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
1995-02-09 21:52 ` Bradley Ross
[not found] ` <3grq8l$jja@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
[not found] ` <3h06rv$4pg@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
[not found] ` <3h3hiv$e49@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
1995-02-06 18:26 ` Stan Shebs
1995-02-07 20:05 ` Robert Dewar
1995-02-09 17:16 ` Mats Weber
1995-02-11 13:55 ` Robert Dewar
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox