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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.szaf.org!news.enyo.de!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT runtime licensing mess
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 18:59:17 +0100
Message-ID: <87sidv6vii.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
References: <0414d9e6-9303-4c91-9cb2-313427c1193b@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.enyo.de 1424800757 20583 192.168.18.20 (24 Feb 2015 17:59:17
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@enyo.de
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7jznYvij4obn6I05TqEC7Tq6Uf0=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:25020
Date: 2015-02-24T18:59:17+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

* Patrick Noffke:

> This got me thinking -- who are AdaCore to choose whether or not to
> include this clause?

This is explicitly permitted under the terms of the GNU General Public
License, version 3, in section 7: “When you convey a copy of a covered
work, you may at your option remove any additional permissions from
that copy, or from any part of it.”  (The GCC run-time library
exception uses the additional permissions framework established by the
GPL.)