From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14349 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2003 08:58:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 14342 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2003 08:58:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dublin.act-europe.fr) (212.157.227.154) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2003 08:58:01 -0000 Received: by dublin.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 525) id ED74B22A071; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:57:59 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:14:00 -0000 From: Arnaud Charlet To: Rainer Orth Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" , Christian Joensson , gcc , Arnaud Charlet Subject: Re: Building the Ada compiler... is http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html correct? Message-ID: <20031106095759.A11721@dublin.act-europe.fr> References: <20031105165315.A29594@fw.j-son.org> <16297.16527.280023.452641@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <16297.16527.280023.452641@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>; from ro@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE on Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 07:25:19PM +0100 X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00266.txt.bz2 > > Any news on having a documented (in the Ada install documentation) > > collection of contributed bootstrap binaries (now including C compilers as > > well as gnat1 and gnatbind) It appears that we were too optimistic about providing binaries, and that this requires too much work/set up on our side. If this is still felt as a necessity, we would be glad to host the binaries contributed by other people on the libre site, although I guess this could also be done on the gcc.gnu.org site directly (whichever way is more convenient). Given that there have been a couple of releases with Ada included, and that more people have a pre-existing Ada set up, this issue may not be as important as it used to be. > * What are the consequences of the above workaround on IRIX? It seems to > break binary compatibility, so if the underlying middle-end bug is fixed > and the workaround reverted, we have a problem. The Ada front-end is not at a stage where binary compatibility can be ensured for lots of various reasons, so I think the above concern is premature. Also, the provided binaries will only be provided to help people bootstrap gnat, they do not have to be binary compatible to build gnat properly. > * Unlike the other backends, GNAT isn't currently relocatable: if GCC/GNAT > is built with the default prefix (/usr/local), but installed with make > DESTDIR=, I get the following error: You simply need to set the environment variable GNAT_ROOT to /usr/local Arno