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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ed34204f6da15e19
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: DTraq Released
References: <44916CA0.9080909@earthlink.net>
 <o8hd2mqmew.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <m2veqyhq8r.fsf@grendel.local>
 <IIilg.7545$lf4.3334@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <m2r71lgcw7.fsf@grendel.local> <i2k67cj45u.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1150748293.10680.1.camel@localhost.localdomain>
From: M E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Date: 19 Jun 2006 22:36:16 +0200
Message-ID: <3lveqwq3wf.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.235.113
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1150749031 88.72.235.113 (19 Jun 2006 22:30:31
 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!inka.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!morpheus.pingos.org!news.szaf.org!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4840
Date: 2006-06-19T22:36:16+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:

> On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 22:12 +0200, M E Leypold wrote:
> 
> > One other questions BTW (I don't know wether I'm totally serious)
> > 
> >  - Since the GNAT 2006 runtime is GPL, don't I have to distribute the
> >    GNAT runtime with the executable and my own source?
> 
> See GPL, �3.

Probably you're referring to the following sentence:

   However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need
   not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source
   or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so
   on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless
   that component itself accompanies the executable.

And exactly that sentence I had in mind when I asked my question
(tongue in cheek). Isn't it rather ironical that I have to distribute
my source with the produced executable and that exactly that piece of
code from which the "infection" started which brought my code under
GPL is exactly what the receiver/user of my executable won't get? 

How ... well, ironic.

Regards -- Markus