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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,aaf0df4d880d28c3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Stephen Leake <Stephen.Leake@gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: TASH Won't Build
Date: 1998/02/05
Message-ID: <34DA1F46.39F0@gsfc.nasa.gov>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 322412380
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <6b06mu$ikm$1@Masala.CC.UH.EDU>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Stephen.Leake@gsfc.nasa.gov
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-02-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


me@myself.and.I.org wrote:
> 
> Good Afternoon,
> 
> I have recently downloaded GNAT 3.10p1 for WinNT (I'm running
> it on Win95), the latest version of Tcl/Tk, and the latest
> version of TASH (7.61?), all for Win.  I have been following
> the instructions in the installation file to the letter, but
> when I get to the step where I try to build tash with
> make, I get a syntax error on line 29 of the make file.

This sounds like you've got another "make" in your path. In bash, do a
"type make"; if this doesn't show the make from the GNAT or Cygwin
distributions, you've got the wrong one, and will have to edit your PATH
definition.

> I have made no attempt to fix the makefile for the simple
> reason that it should not be necessary to fix it.  After
> all, I made no modifications to it at all.  So with that
> in mind, does anyone have any idea what the problem is?
> 
> I've tried a make on one of the demo files in the TASH
> distribution and I got a syntax error at the first line.
> 
> Of course, the demo programs do not build with gnatmake.

these symptoms can also be caused by problems with PATH. In general,
edit PATH to contain ONLY Windows and GNAT stuff; when everything works,
you can add back your other PATH stuff and see what breaks.

> 
> I only want to have access to the TK library from Ada.
> Unfortunately, it looks like even that is asking for
> too much.
> 
> If anyone has the bright idea of responding with "RTFM", please
> don't.  I've read the FM, and as usual it has told me
> absolutely nothing I needed to know.  I'm getting used to
> it by now however...
> 
> Maybe more people would read FMs if the SFMs (S being for
> Stupid), actually had something to do with the programs
> they were attatched to.
> 
> Sorry for the last bit of insolence, but I'm losing it. I've
> been following a tutorial which is innaccurate, I've had
> to download GNAT and GDB twice, and even now GDB looks like
> it's an alpha release (no native look & feel and half the

Nobody advertised that GDB would have a native look and feel, so don't
expect it!

> time it crashes when I try to load a file, and the help doesn't
> work, and it displays C code) -- that's in a different email.

You should use NT for any code developement work; 95 just isn't ready
for real time.

As for displaying C code, I'm not clear what you mean. The "main"
program for a GNAT-compiled Ada application is a short C file, so maybe
that is what you are seeing. But when you set a breakpoint in an Ada
file, surely you see that Ada code?

> Just want to let you know that I've spent more time trying
> to fix GNAT, GDB, and TASH than I have actually programming
> in Ada!

Perhaps you should consider other modes of programming; many people
write lots of code without getting into the debugger.

> 
> *Sigh*
> 
> Please note that my email address is buggered to aovid
> spammers, so please post answers here.  No doubt these answers
> will prove useful to others who will have the misfortune
> of trying to install GNAT, GDB, and TASH.
> 
> Thank You.

-- 
- Stephe