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: a07f3367d7,23c0de5a42cf667e
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT packages in Linux distributions
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 11:46:55 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <87k4rcw0kw.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
References: <j5e1x31qvn1b$.11ywrjmshtauz$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<87mxw9x7no.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<t8liq7w6ffnm$.19yq5hkq6tdto$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<87bpcoydfx.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <op.vcgjkcctule2fv@garhos>
	<82tyqghz4x.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 09:46:55 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="aWhQTHgfdnD2YXcebEBGuQ";
	logging-data="19216"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/wSNaTd+jczjlR30SnMSxo"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mG9aGl5oLIllUfbZx4WnVqgM2l0=
	sha1:zpNCFb3a6sgShRtIQMpHYBy0cZU=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:11441
Date: 2010-05-10T11:46:55+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
> "Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:
>
>> Le Sun, 09 May 2010 23:26:10 +0200, Ludovic Brenta
>> <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> a écrit:
>>>> Whatever reasons might be, they aren't good. (:-()
>>>
>>> Oh no?  What about top-secret Ada code from the military that triggers a
>>> bug in GNAT?
>> Yes, every one can understand that and probably did think about that
>> while reading your words. However, a patch does not expose any private
>> data,  unless you claim some details all over the worlds.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure this is more a matter of GPL vs Pro than a matter of
>> privacy (what privacy may be violated with a bug correction ?)
>
> The bug database includes the code that triggers the bug.
>
> It might be possible to expose only the fixes to public purview, but
> even the descriptions of the bug might contain some private information.
> It would take a lot of manual effort to present a "clean" public view.
> I'd rather AdaCore spend that effort on improving the tools.

Actually, the fixes *are* exposed to public purview.  This happens when
AdaCore merge their fixes into GCC.  Each patch appears as a
self-contained email on the gcc-patches mailing list, complete with a
technical description of the bug and even the AdaCore bug number; only,
we don't know what triggered the bug, so it is difficult to relate the
technical description to a publicly known bug trigger.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.