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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,923a044bad102ebc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-20 09:30:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GCC 3.1 released Date: 20 May 2002 09:30:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <4519e058.0205200830.7762322f@posting.google.com> References: <3ce3a7de.6340210@news.essex.ac.uk> <5ee5b646.0205161408.47a7f726@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0205181220.66cba6c2@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.115.221.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1021912216 19059 127.0.0.1 (20 May 2002 16:30:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 May 2002 16:30:16 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24420 Date: 2002-05-20T16:30:16+00:00 List-Id: Jerry van Dijk wrote in message news:... > dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes: > > > Our new approach for public releases, integration into the > > GCC 3 tree, does not give any such guarantees. The plus is > > that it is far closer to our development wavefront, the minus is that > > it is likely to be somewhat unstable. > > Just for clarification: DOes the GCC 3.1 release mean there will be no more > public releases from ACT ? I'd like to hear that too. > -> if so, that means I will have to set up the GCC 3.1 build tree and ACATS > and start hunting bugs which may already have been solved by ACT, instead > of using my time more productively. I don't think that should be that much of an issue. They will want to integrate fixes into the gcc baseline fairly quickly, because if you hold back baseline changes, it becomes a huge chore to put them all in later and keep things working. This is expecially true if other gcc users are making changes directly to the baseline. > All in all, if there are no more public releases for NT from ACT, we windows > users need to organize ourself, to make sure that GNAT remains an alternative I agree. I've been looking into this a bit. Somehow I doubt I'll have the free time to do it all myself though. But I can certianly share what little I've found out. We at least need some kind of "howto" for Win32 builds. -- T.E.D. Home - mailto:dennison@telepath.com (Yahoo: Ted_Dennison) Homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html