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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7684e927a2475d0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: can one build commercial applications with latest gnat and other
 licenses related questions...
References: <tLmlg.119263$dW3.82693@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>
 <449660f0$0$11077$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
 <jowtbdcubc.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1150717184.087134.177850@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <e7f7t6$qie$1@online.de>
 <1151050924.969806.284410@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
 <e7h852$7h0$1@online.de> <jccum3-trl.ln1@newserver.thecreems.com>
 <e7j2i7$4vl$1@online.de> <i0lvm3-h59.ln1@newserver.thecreems.com>
 <e7jct3$o55$1@online.de> <1opsgypqr9.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <8764ipscnm.fsf@willow.rfc1149.net>
From: M E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Date: 25 Jun 2006 13:55:48 +0200
Message-ID: <gk7j35v48r.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.230.88
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151236184 88.72.230.88 (25 Jun 2006 13:49:44 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.tele.dk!feed118.news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!news-fra1.dfn.de!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5017
Date: 2006-06-25T13:55:48+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Samuel Tardieu <sam@rfc1149.net> writes:

> >>>>> "MEL" == M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> writes:
> 
> MEL> Good question. The FSF (whose point of view actually has zero
> MEL> impact on the discussion about GPL software from ACT, since it's
> MEL> not the FSF forcing ACT in any way to use GPL ...) has, with
> MEL> regard to the GPL, probably the opinion that linking means
> MEL> "derive a work".
> 

> Most of the GNAT runtime is owned by the FSF. 

Oops yes. Oversight on my side. I should say: The FSF didn't force ACT
to drop the linking exception. But this was only an aside.

The discussion surrounding my answer had already drifted in wider
areas, which I'd like to paraphrase as "how can linking constitute a
derived work". To which I just craved to give some opinions of my own
(a - that I don't think it should be in all cases, b - from where I
think that position of the GPL originally came).

Regards -- Markus