Re: Poll: Qt4Ada as alternative to GtkAda

[clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley)]

In article <mailman.8.1154082903.32700.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>, Preben Randhol <randhol+cla2@pvv.org> writes:
> michael bode <michael.bode@laserline.de> wrote on 28/07/2006 (12:30) :
>> But I think this is quite clear: gnat from FSF still has the linking
>> exception. GCC-GNAT 4.1 is available for some Linux distributions
>> (MacOS X?) and I think MinGW gnat 3.4.5 is available for Windows.
> 
> So it means that what ACT contributes to FSF (gcc) is GMGPL, while what
> they package themselves is GPL?
> 

Yes, that's right. If you pull a FSF GCC distribution, with a FSF version
number, from a FSF server, it's my understanding that the Ada RTL component
is licensed under the GMGPL.

A theoretical concern that I had a few weeks ago was could ACT, at a later
date, move the GNAT.* packages in the FSF distribution to been GPL only on
the basis that they were not part of the Ada 95 standard, and hence, like
GtkAda, ACT was free to do with them whatever they wanted to do ?

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
If Google's motto is "don't be evil", then how did we get Google Groups 2 ?