Re: Static linking of GNAT library

[Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <8o76gn$4el$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> writes:
> In article <8o5lh3$am51@news.kvaerner.com>,
>   "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> wrote:
>> It is not a sales pitch when they tell you why they cannot
>> help you. If they helped you out for free they would not
>> honour their contract with SGI.
> 
> Note by the way that this is a condition that SGI insisted on.
> We actually preferred that we have the ability to provide direct
> support for SGI users, but SGI prefers to keep all support
> issues for SGI software handled through their support
> organization. If things work as they should the engineer in
> question at SGI will refer the issue to us if SGI cannot solve
> it.

There is always the possibility that SGI might change their mind
in the future and want to renegotiate terms.  I know of another
company where managers regret terms their predecessors used to
constrain the relationship with a company like ACT. There is no
guarantee they will ever take action, but the whole management
tree in the relevant area has changed, such that different interests
are involved.