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: 103376,3e26dfa741e64e5f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.easynews.com!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!news.he.net!xara.net!gxn.net!194.159.246.34.MISMATCH!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2005 Edition is now available
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 06:56:22 +0100
Organization: Pushface
Message-ID: <m27jdg44qh.fsf@grendel.local>
References: <432919be$0$10539$4d4eb98e@read.news.fr.uu.net>
 <m3acieu4yp.fsf@rr.trudgett> <m3mzmdh0jx.fsf@rr.trudgett>
 <qpI2$Z6S+IKj@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <1126868191.519850.18060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
 <873bo5jjb6.fsf@willow.rfc1149.net>
 <1126875543.239666.325290@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <m3irx08kz8.fsf@rr.trudgett>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1126936578 28101 62.49.19.209 (17 Sep 2005 05:56:18
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 05:56:18 +0000 (UTC)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:C8xwEVo7C1ZamUdEwYWohYz2tW4=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (darwin)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4816
Date: 2005-09-17T06:56:22+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

David Trudgett <wpower@zeta.org.au.nospamplease> writes:

> I have made it quite clear that the mere fact of linking the
> compiler's run-time with a non-GPL program (even a proprietary one),
> in no way impinges upon the freedom of that library, nor does it
> endanger its future continued freedom.

This is entirely your opinion, clearly the FSF (who were probably
acting on legal advice) felt constrained, probably reluctantly, to
support the LGPL to allow the linking of an OSS library into a
non-open program.