Re: ADA for OS/2

[John Poltorak <jp@eyup.org>]

Stephen Leake wrote:

> John Poltorak <jp@eyup.org> writes:
>
> > From README.BUILD:-
> >
> > This installation starts from the sources of GCC 2.8.1
> >
> >   -- Apply patches (gcc-281.dif) from the src directory.
> >
> > Do I really need to get hold of the source for gcc 2.8.1,
> > just to be able to build 3.13p ?
>
> Yes.
>
> Why is this surprising? You are building a compiler from sources; part
> of the sources for that compiler is gcc 2.8.1.
>
> Getting hold of the source for gcc 2.8.1 is no harder than getting
> hold of the source for gnat 3.13p.
>
> Perhaps you are implying that the source distribution for gnat 3.13p
> should include the source distribution of gcc 2.8.1. That might be
> convenient for you, but it is common practice to simply reference an
> independent source distribution, when that imposes no significant
> burden on the user.
>
> > If so, do I just run:- ?
> >
> > patch -p0 <gcc-281.dif
>
> Yes. It would be better if this specific instruction were in the
> README file, but a quick read of patch --help makes it pretty clear.
> In general, it is assumed people installing from source can figure out
> how to use the required tools.

It really does seem unfair... If you use NT everything is on a plate. You
just download a binary archive and you can be happily using GNAT 3.13p
within a few minutes without requiring any knowledge of building
compilers. If you use OS/2, the same task is going to take several weeks
or months. I don't know anyone who has been successful building OS/2
binaries, which  kind of begs the question who is the OS/2 patch designed
for? I note the OS/2 patch is 8000 lines long which is twice as long as
all the other patches put together, and I think if someone is going to the
trouble of providing such complicated patches, their work will not be very
well appreciated if no one can make any use of it. Maybe providing a
simple build script is all that is necessary to make it work...

>
> --
> -- Stephe

--
John