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: GLADE and GPL (was: what DOES the GPL really say?)
Date: 1997/06/28
Message-ID: <dewar.867499831@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 253186939
References: <33B2B5C8.41A0@does.not.exist.com> <5ousck$6rj@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
 <5p0eum$1293$1@prime.imagin.net> <5p1s2l$2a2$1@news.nyu.edu>
 <dewar.867464659@merv>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1997-06-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Richard said

<<Richard said

<<First of all, the exception being referred to is an exception to the
LGPL, not the GPL.  Secondly, it did not originate with ACT, but was
used in the small set of run-time functions used in GCC.
>>


which confused me because it seemed exactly wrong. I just talked to him,
and he confirmed that he got LGPL and GPL the wrong way round in that
first sentence :-)

Also his point on the exception originating with GCC was that the *idea*
of such an exception does indeed originate there.