* GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? @ 1998-12-20 0:00 Ada Development at shagbadger 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Ada Development at shagbadger @ 1998-12-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Could someone please explain the following ? 1) Why a glibc2 linked version of gnat 3.10p has not been released ? 2) Why the fact that the distribution does not "hide" the gcc code, as it is destined always to be at least a few versions behind the one most people have installed ? 3) Why the New York http site directs you to GNAT and GNAT promptly labels you "a student" ( obviously if you can't afford "Support" you must be a student) and sends you back to the New York site ? These problems are relatively easy to fix for someone who knows the code .... but they're good problems for support contracts .......... This proves that Ada programmers have more of a life than C programmers... as no-one it seems ( including myself ) can be bothered to wrestle this "GPL" source from GNAT LTD PLC ( or INC. for you american buddies) and produce a hassle free distribution that runs on the "GPL" platform GNU/LINUX. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? 1998-12-20 0:00 GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? Ada Development at shagbadger @ 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Simon Wright @ 1998-12-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Ada Development at shagbadger <Ada95@shagbadger.demon.co.uk> writes: > 1) Why a glibc2 linked version of gnat 3.10p has not been released ? There have been lots of posts on how to do this (something to do with the size of sigset?? anyway, look up the archives of chat@gnat.com) > 2) Why the fact that the distribution does not "hide" the gcc code, > as it is destined always to be at least a few versions behind the > one most people have installed ? I don't understand what you mean. GNAT often requires patches to the base GCC, so a release has to be version-dependent. > 3) Why the New York http site directs you to GNAT and GNAT promptly > labels you "a student" ( obviously if you can't afford "Support" you > must be a student) and sends you back to the New York site ? Perhaps if you used ftp (as Darwin intended) you would have less trouble! ftp@cs.nyu.edu > These problems are relatively easy to fix for someone who knows the > code .... but they're good problems for support contracts .......... > > This proves that Ada programmers have more of a life than C > programmers... as no-one it seems ( including myself ) can be > bothered to wrestle this "GPL" source from GNAT LTD PLC ( or > INC. for you american buddies) and produce a hassle free > distribution that runs on the "GPL" platform GNU/LINUX. But there is absolutely NO trouble getting the source! And it's ACT (Ada Core Technologies). BTW, folks, if you want to set up a support contract, don't bother mailing sales@act.com, they won't even bother to reply, try sales@gnat.com instead :-) On a personal note, I must be getting old, cos your choice of an obscene hostname very nearly stopped me bothering to reply. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright @ 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Ada95 @ 1998-12-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Wright wrote: >> 1) Why a glibc2 linked version of gnat 3.10p has not been released ? > > There have been lots of posts on how to do this (something to do with > the size of sigset?? anyway, look up the archives of chat@gnat.com) > Next time someone gives you a spec., code to the spec. , not to what you think the spec. should be, similarly next time you answer a posting try answering the question. I know how to fix the distribution, like you said there are "lots" ( keep that "lots"in mind for a bit later.. don't want to lose you again just yet). Now read my question 1) again ( up there ^^^ ) , I not going to repeat myself. Save this as well... all the answers to 3.10p on glibc2 were posted a year ago.... now look down to a thread started by _Garath_ ( nice inoffensive name ) " Gnat 3.10p and Redhat 5.2, a year on, you must all be getting tried of this same question , I wonder how tried the "paid" support boys at AdaCore are of it ?...................... keep that in mind as well. > > 2) Why the fact that the distribution does not "hide" the gcc code, > > as it is destined always to be at least a few versions behind the > > one most people have installed ? > > I don't understand what you mean. GNAT often requires patches to the > base GCC, so a release has to be version-dependent. > Exactly because GNAT *ALWAYS" requires a patch to GCC, GNAT is always going to be supplied with its own version of GCC, which as AdaCore can't keep up with those poor misguided "C" programmers, is always going to be versions behind. So MOST of us want to be able to have both versions. This requires a separate environment, because the code in the GNAT compiler ( used for compiling Ada ) insists on calling itself "gcc" and using the gcc environment variables. Now suppose someone who knew the GNAT code wrote a simple awk/sed script which replaced every occurance of "gcc" in the source tree with "gnatgcc". As if by magic a GNAT distribution which could coexist with a better gcc version. Now look at a posting by Bruno BEAUFILS "gnat 310.p and gcc 2.8.1" (a truely "beautiful" name - maybe should have tried something offensive - might have got a response ). Still with me, or are you already posting the solution to Brunos problem "don't use 2.8.1 gnat3.10p comes with 2.7.2.1 ! " Note my username "Ada95"... can you guess why I've created an account all for Ada95 ? > > > 3) Why the New York http site directs you to GNAT and GNAT promptly > > labels you "a student" ( obviously if you can't afford "Support" you > > must be a student) and sends you back to the New York site ? Now did you answer the question of why neither will own upto having a freely available compiler ? or did you tell me where I could get it via ftp ( which I already knew ) ? lets find out ...................... > > Perhaps if you used ftp (as Darwin intended) you would have less > trouble! ftp@cs.nyu.edu > Perhaps when Darwin prevails and Ada remove removes itself from the "code pool" I can stop trying to find information regards a freely available compiler from a development team which would really rather I paid for it. > > > These problems are relatively easy to fix for someone who knows the > > code .... but they're good problems for support contracts .......... > > > > This proves that Ada programmers have more of a life than C > > programmers... as no-one it seems ( including myself ) can be > > bothered to wrestle this "GPL" source from GNAT LTD PLC ( or > > INC. for you american buddies) and produce a hassle free > > distribution that runs on the "GPL" platform GNU/LINUX. > > But there is absolutely NO trouble getting the source! And it's ACT > (Ada Core Technologies). BTW, folks, if you want to set up a support > contract, don't bother mailing sales@act.com, they won't even bother > to reply, try sales@gnat.com instead :-) > And so to bring it all together.... We ALL known that theres NO trouble getting the source ! what about the "Hassle Free Distribution" bit ( or were you too busy spitting feathers to read that ... Also ;-) I know its "ACT", I was "foxing" ... highlighting the one to one relationship between GNAT ( Free source code ) and ACT ( commerical support company) . And thankyou for re inforcing this ( folks .... its sales@gnat.com NOT sales@act.com ). Summary ) 1) You've got to ask yourself why the world is full of free C code projects, whereas the Ada world has zip interest ( except money) in maintaining its own compiler and providing free "Hassle Free Distributions". Is it because they enjoy it and we Ada types have enough at the end of a working day ? 2) You've also got to ask yourself who gains from a free distribution which requires more than a little effort to install ? don't take a position ....just ask yourself ...who gains? Who gains from a year of answering the same glibc2 problem instead of saving alot of effort and releasing a glibc2 compiled version ? Now I'm either one conspirancy theory short of MI6's love for Princess Diane, or there are a lot of people posting to comp.lang.ada and gnat.chat because someone doesn't mind it being that way. > > On a personal note, Remember you started it ........................ > I must be getting old, cos your choice of an > obscene hostname very nearly stopped me bothering to reply. "shagbadger" is a play on words, its feeder to get your reaction such that I might judge you in the same instant you judge me. My vision is of a very english creature, who comes alive at night, hunted to extinction and fighting back big time. Don't tell me , I know your vision was one of two. You preceive me to be vulgar and I perceive you to be a bore "pognor" ! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 @ 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk 1998-12-22 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-12-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Ada95 (Ada95@saltedchocolateballs.co.uk) wrote: and got me sufficiently irritated to even post a reply: : I not going to repeat myself. Save this as well... all the answers to : 3.10p on glibc2 were posted a year : ago.... now look down to a thread started by _Garath_ ( nice inoffensive : name ) " Gnat 3.10p and : Redhat 5.2, a year on, you must all be getting tried of this same : question , I wonder how tried the "paid" support boys at AdaCore are of : it ?...................... keep that in mind as well. So, instead of complaining, why not build and distribute one yourself ? As GNAT is GPL, I fail to see the relevence of the negative ACT reference. : Exactly because GNAT *ALWAYS" requires a patch to GCC, GNAT is always : going to be supplied with its own version of GCC, which as AdaCore : can't keep up with those poor misguided "C" programmers, is always : going to be versions behind. From 2.8.x on, all GNAT relevant patches are included in gcc. However, I fail to see what you you hope to archieve by using such insulting language. : to Brunos problem "don't use 2.8.1 gnat3.10p comes with 2.7.2.1 ! " Note : my username "Ada95"... can : you guess why I've created an account all for Ada95 ? No, please tell us... : 1) You've got to ask yourself why the world is full of free C code : projects, whereas the Ada world : has zip interest ( except money) in maintaining its own compiler and : providing free "Hassle Free Distributions". Is it because they enjoy it : and we Ada types have enough at the end of a working day ? I fail to see the comparison between free C code projects and an Ada Compiler. There is a lot of free Ada code too. And the Ada community _is_ provided with a free compiler (thanks to the work done at ACT). If you feel this is not good enough, why are _you_ not improving it ? : 2) You've also got to ask yourself who gains from a free distribution : which requires more than a : little effort to install ? don't take a position ....just ask yourself : ...who gains? Who gains from a year of : answering the same glibc2 problem instead of saving alot of effort and : releasing a glibc2 compiled : version ? If, as you are implying, ACT does this on purpose to get support money, and you do not like this, why not end this by supplying a glibc2 version yourself ? : Now I'm either one conspirancy theory short of MI6's love for Princess : Diane, or there are a lot of : people posting to comp.lang.ada and gnat.chat because someone doesn't : mind it being that way. Sorry, I do not understand what you are refering to here. Jerry. -- -- Jerry van Dijk | email: jdijk@acm.org -- Leiden, Holland | member Team-Ada -- Ada & Win32: http://stad.dsl.nl/~jvandyk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-12-22 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-12-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <F4C9An.A2@jvdsys.stuyts.nl> jerry@jvdsys.stuyts.nl (Jerry van Dijk) writes: >From 2.8.x on, all GNAT relevant patches are included in gcc. Not completely correct. It is true for GNAT 3.10, which is what I think you meant, but GNAT 3.11 has some patches that postdate the GCC 2.8.1 release. They will be in GCC 2.9, however. They are also in recent EGCS releases, but EGCS has changed the front end interface in an incompatible way, so it is not possible to have a version of a front end that works for both EGCS and GCC2 (and EGCS will continue to change the interface, so this will be an ongoing problem). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 @ 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-12-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <x7vpv9e9c5l.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>, Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> writes: <good answers snipped> > On a personal note, I must be getting old, cos your choice of an > obscene hostname very nearly stopped me bothering to reply. Perhaps that is why some others did not reply. Larry Kilgallen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Ada95 @ 1998-12-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <x7vpv9e9c5l.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>, Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> writes: > > <good answers snipped> > > > On a personal note, I must be getting old, cos your choice of an > > obscene hostname very nearly stopped me bothering to reply. > > Perhaps that is why some others did not reply. > > Larry Kilgallen Perhaps you might Like to read the questions also before snipping Numbties NO1 answers. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1998-12-22 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1998-12-20 0:00 GNAT Binary Distributions : GPL or Not ??? Ada Development at shagbadger 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk 1998-12-22 0:00 ` Richard Kenner 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 1998-12-21 0:00 ` Ada95
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox