Re: Lack of Mature Tools (was: Lockheed Martin, Green Hills, etc.)

[dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner)]

On Thu, 04 May 2000 00:28:16 GMT, Ken Garlington <Ken.Garlington@computer.org> wrote:
>"Matthew Woodcraft" <mattheww@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
>news:jhi*wLbro@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
>> >The point is, I will say it again, that we want to make it
>> >very clear that Ada Core Technologies makes no kinds of
>> >guarantees, nor takes any legal responsibilities, for the
>> >public versions of GNAT. We do not want to take any other
>> >steps that could be misinterpreted by others as indications
>> >that this is not the case.
>>
>> You do guarantee that the source you distribute matches the binaries
>> you distribute, no?
>
>Somehow, I'm guessing the answer to this question (with respect to the
>public version) is "no".

The whole reason for the question (assuming that they are distributing
anything, which they certainly do to the NYU people) is that they are
violating the GPL if the answer is no. Since the FSF holds the copyright,
if they distribute, the source must match the binary or they could be
in for legal trouble.

(In theory. In practice, the FSF has much better things to do with
their time than fight with ACT.)

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org

The hell that is supposedly out there could be no worse than
the hell that is sometimes seen in here.