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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GCC 4.9.0 (2014) for Max OS X Mavericks
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:41:31 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lyzjcxv4ac.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <02796daf-0ab5-4722-a4ef-42155568e3c5@googlegroups.com>
	<lyr3ydzmhl.fsf@pushface.org>
	<6bfc0677-977e-4f78-9496-0f4817bd3c78@googlegroups.com>
	<lya951yw40.fsf@pushface.org> <lyfveqwqls.fsf@pushface.org>
	<3a0a4e0b-0329-407b-ba2e-d5fe28ed6394@googlegroups.com>
	<1383085512435020045.205080laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
	<ly4mv5wtxi.fsf@pushface.org>
	<f7b56b1d-4ac6-41ab-bb81-1cea4f584b41@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="110351425d23d895aa4e17b47c8a8886";
	logging-data="4120"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18H6FkK0DFrxPe3zu7pjLpzBvf+9/s5zs4="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Yh+kag2g8yjDbq7haEx6UpzTiOM=
	sha1:OBZyGzov87qXe7cn8EnZUw9yp8U=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22507
Date: 2014-10-15T14:41:31+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

David Botton <david@botton.com> writes:

>> It's not GMGPL, it's GCC Runtime Library Exception.
>
> Doesn't that work out in the end to be the same as the GMGPL?

Yes, from a user's point of view, but They Are Not The Same.

> XMLAda is delivered as part of GNAT's runtime now and with that
> exception and therefore should not infect any application using it
> with GPL.

XMLAda isn't delivered as part of GNAT's runtime (unless any Pro user
can tell us different). There are three possible sources, to my
knowledge:

(a) the one available to AdaCore Pro customers
(b) the one available as part of GNAT GPL from Libre
(c) the one available from the anonymous SVN repo

(a) probably, and (c) definitely, have the Runtime Library Exception

(b) does not (it looks as though it has been edited out of the source
    as part of the process of producing the distribution, leaving blank
    lines).

> Can anyone confirm if that is the same license being used in the GNAT
> Pro editions? That would further confirm practically speaking XMLAda
> can be used for closed development.

Unless you use the GPL version.