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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no 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!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "G.B." <bauhaus@futureapps.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:10:46 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <mafsb2$nl2$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0Kgqw.953330$_k.685364@fx16.iad>
 <199c826a-923e-497f-a8e2-9e732c8a5665@googlegroups.com>
 <87bnmetex4.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <4ae7f0d5-d681-4be9-95bc-b5e789b3ad40@googlegroups.com>
 <87tx06rve6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <d865c2cd-dd78-4dd9-8ca5-7526bc781faf@googlegroups.com>
 <87lhlirpk0.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <bb6afd60-da67-4b0a-93ca-2921b985cc3e@googlegroups.com>
 <m8ds96$po2$1@news.albasani.net> <m8em0g$a03$2@dont-email.me>
 <724c149f-0396-42a4-8594-bdbf21cce0d9@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: nonlegitur@futureapps.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:10:10 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="b96887e80893c84a90c3007226ca0d1c";
	logging-data="24226"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/SrWxSEibqe9RS3SCqmOb7rMpYi16fRCg="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <724c149f-0396-42a4-8594-bdbf21cce0d9@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+nj2rppWpfDrkBUMxtAwomZclgo=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24810
Date: 2015-01-30T13:10:46+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 30.01.15 12:48, Marius Amado-Alves wrote:
>> The GNAT Pro/GNAT GPL dichotomy seems unique: two products with essentially
>> identical features, differing only in the run-time license.
>
> Not unique at all, this is called "double licensing" and last time I check it was a wide spread model.
>
> I don't understand the above discussion of AdaCore's free GNAT vs. FSF's GCC: is the license not exactly the same (GPL)?

The Terms and Conditions are the same with one exception,

-- As a special exception under Section 7 of GPL version 3, you are 
granted --
-- additional permissions described in the GCC Runtime Library 
Exception,   --
-- version 3.1, as published by the Free Software Foundation. 
     --

Which see.