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

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <8eqgfn$8q61@news.cis.okstate.edu>,
  dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org wrote:

> 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.

Well of course the initial version we put out at NYU has
matching objects and sources, the source is what we build
the object from. My point is simply that beyond that point
we are not distributing anything, and we cannot make any
statements about matching sources and binaries once it
leaves our hands. In practice we have often seen people
distribute the binary version of GNAT without providing
the sources or pointers to them, which is of course improper
(though in practice not serious).

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

There would be no question of fighting here. We work very
closely with the FSF, and if RMS or any of the other FSF
guys had any concerns they would simply let us know and
we would fix things :-) Remember that GNAT is part of the
GNU system.

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.