Re: Root of a GNAT problem (was: Gnat v3.05 bug or compilation problem

[ica2ph@alpha1.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de (Peter Hermann)]

MAKOUDI Jaouad (Stag. Kermarrec) (makoudi@titan.enst-bretagne.fr) wrote:

: While compiling a DSA program, I got this message : 

: building dsa/receiver/rns.adb from /dsa/lib/garlic/rns.adb
                                              ^^^^^^  maybe your smelling problem ;-)
: +===========================GNAT BUG DETECTED==============================+
: | Error detected at "rns.adb", line 36:4                                   |
: | Please submit bug report by email to report@gnat.com                     |
: | Use a subject line meaningful to you and us to track the bug             |
: | Include full sources in ASCII in a format compatible with gnatchop       |
: | First line of sources must be marked by an Ada -- comment line           |
: | Last line of sources must be last line of email message (no signature!)  |
: | See gnatinfo.txt file for more info on procedure for submitting bugs     |
: | 3.05 (960607) (m68k-rtems) Gigi abort, Code=999                          |
: +==========================================================================+

: I don't really understand the meaning of that !!!

And you will possibly never understand it.

The root of the GNAT/ACT problem is the following:
Your inquiry above will lead to a repost by Robert Dewar, in which he will 
explain that you should have reported this to report@gnat.com.
Of course you are not a paying customer and therefore your report 
will be of lowest priority and possibly never considered.

In the past, a very large world-wide community of volunteers sent their
bug reports which were neatly classified and the status of the bug
could be traced. Times have changed due to lack of sponsoring.
But unfortunately, the mechanism too, which I personally consider
a great disadvantage for all of us volunteers and especially for ACT.
Why for ACT?
For us non-paying customers
(it is not always money, it is sometimes an institutional anti-Ada-attitude)
it is sufficient and acceptable to get bug-fixing on the lowest priority level.
ACT must live on the basis of the customers' money, of course.
The important point is the traceability of a bug inquiry.
If this is no more given, then the number of volunteer reports,
which IS a kind of energy/money too, will go dramatically down.
In the past, I gave several dozens of bug reports although
this has never been publicly recognized in e.g. a list of contributors.
Nevertheless I am satisfied with the feeling to have contributed to the maturing
of a good product GNAT.
Today: Why should I send a bug report?:
  -- Will they care?
  -- Did they receive it?
  -- Did they classify my bug?
  -- Is my problem already known there?
  -- Is it fixed in Version 3.07?

--
Peter Hermann  Tel:+49-711-685-3611 Fax:3758 ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de
Pfaffenwaldring 27, 70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)