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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1d8ab55e71d08f3d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say?
Date: 1997/06/26
Message-ID: <dewar.867337719@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 252749789
References: <m2oh8ydzt8.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> <dewar.867079112@merv>
 <33B014E3.3343@no.such.com> <5oqp9s$7vj$1@news.nyu.edu>
 <33B13BF6.79C7@no.such.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1997-06-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Wes says

<<However, that is not what people have been telling me.  Several times
I have been reprimanded for saying I cannot incorporate a particular
bit of code due to the GPL.
>>

Huh? This is like saying you have been reprimanded for refusing to make
an illicit copy of proprietary software. Whoever is doing the reprimanding
here is either incompetent, or does not mind if their company violates
copyrights. What possible misconception would lead this reprimander to
be so free in assuming you should violate copyright restrictions. Pretty odd!

<<It does not seem unreasonable to me either.  But David Weller's
approach, and the GNAT approach are far more helpful in that they
allow me to actually use the code, not just look at it.  Call me
(adjective) if you want for cooperating with software hoarders,
but I tilt at bigger windmills.
>>

GNAT is not special here, other gcc compilers take the same viewpoint, and
for example the g++ library has a similar statement (not quite identical,
since we added language to specifically allow generic instantiations --
probably templates give rise to the same issue in the C case, but we wanted
things to be quite clear in the GNAT case).

Note however that this *only* applies to the runtime of GNAT, it does NOT
apply to GNAT units in the compiler. The example I gave was a tool that
needed to use the GNAT scanner, it would be a violation of copyright to
build and distribute such a tool (incorporating scn.adb) without following
the GPL rules.

So if you are simply using GNAT to generate programs, everything is fine, a
and the GPL does not stand in your way.

If you want to build and distribute tools that make use of parts of the
GNAT compiler itself that are covered by the normal GPL, you must abide
by the restrictions.