Re: LGPL Requirements (was: Selecting Ada95 compiler for MSDOS realtime application)

[dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)]

F. Britt Snodgrass says

>Perhaps Richard's comment was made precisely because he has read the
>GNU Library General Public License (LGPL) that covers GNAT's libraries.

  This is confused, that is not the way GNAT's libraries are distributed.
  It always amazes me that people run off on such irrelevant arguments without
  even bothering to look!

>The LGPL makes no distinction between compilers and any other type of

  All discussion of the LGPL is irrelevant to GNAT!

>I would be happy to have someone convince me I'm reading too much into
>the LGPL but it seems pretty clear to me.  As much as I like GNAT, using
>it to develop embedded software for a non-free commercial product seems
>to levy additional requirements compared to using a non-free Ada compiler.
>Am I wrong?

  Yes, completely wrong. You are in fact also misreading the LGPL, but
  since it is irrelevant to GNAT, there is no point in persuing it.

For reference, here is the license used on GNAT runtime components:

-- GNAT is free software;  you can  redistribute it  and/or modify it under --
-- terms of the  GNU General Public License as published  by the Free Soft- --
-- ware  Foundation;  either version 2,  or (at your option) any later ver- --
-- sion.  GNAT is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITH- --
-- OUT ANY WARRANTY;  without even the  implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY --
-- or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License --
-- for  more details.  You should have  received  a copy of the GNU General --
-- Public License  distributed with GNAT;  see file COPYING.  If not, write --
-- to  the Free Software Foundation,  59 Temple Place - Suite 330,  Boston, --
-- MA 02111-1307, USA.                                                      --
--                                                                          --
-- As a special exception,  if other files  instantiate  generics from this --
-- unit, or you link  this unit with other files  to produce an executable, --
-- this  unit  does not  by itself cause  the resulting  executable  to  be --
-- covered  by the  GNU  General  Public  License.  This exception does not --
-- however invalidate  any other reasons why  the executable file  might be --
-- covered by the  GNU Public License.                                      --

As you can see from this there are no additional requirements compared to
using a non-free Ada compiler. You can build proprietary products, embedded
gizmos, or classified software using GNAT with no problems whatsoever in
this department.

A lot of people have an interest in spreading FUD on this point, so let's
try to keep things clear here. In particular, please READ the licenses that
apply, not ones that don't!