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: 
 border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:04:55 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <maicsm$bak$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0Kgqw.953330$_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$2@dont-email.me>
 <724c149f-0396-42a4-8594-bdbf21cce0d9@googlegroups.com>
 <mafse7$nul$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:04:55 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="da745e888d4a5182b5fda6212bbb0a63";
 logging-data="11604"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
 posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/E+qS9g4Ca2naMgW9rIQxyuRMPCL1ytVc="
User-Agent: Pan/0.139 (Sexual Chocolate; GIT bf56508 git://git.gnome.org/pan2)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Jmfx/5kJ0wQCLSTuqOGqFyH71us=
Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:192133
Date: 2015-01-31T11:04:55+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:12:24 +0100, Björn Lundin wrote:

> On 2015-01-30 12:48, Marius Amado-Alves wrote:
> 
>> I don't understand the above discussion of AdaCore's free GNAT vs.
>> FSF's GCC: is the license not exactly the same (GPL)?
> 
> GPL for the compiler - yes both of then have the same license. But GNAT
> GPL, also have GPL'd _runtime_ (files that the compiler automatically
> links into the exe),
> with makes the OUTCOME of the compiler GPL.
> 
> GNAT FSF has a runtime with exceptions,
> so the OUTCOME is not GPL'd by the compiler.
> 
> In other words, you can make non-GPL programs/libraries with GNAT-FSF.
> But EVERYTHING you create with GNAT-GPL is GPL'd. Automatically.

Presumably that permits you to use the GPL compiler to produce non-GPL 
executables ... iff they are zero footprint so they include nothing from 
the RTS or libraries.

But outside of embedded microcontrollers, that's a vanishingly rare use 
case.

-- Brian