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: 103376,13b7917466f2d19 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-06 10:51:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT and GCC 3.0 Date: 6 Oct 2001 10:51:29 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0110060951.559b8bcf@posting.google.com> References: <9a575af3.0110020747.2304ce86@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0110041038.5c321817@posting.google.com> <36c6f8dd.0110051506.3fdabae0@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1002390689 28693 127.0.0.1 (6 Oct 2001 17:51:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Oct 2001 17:51:29 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13834 Date: 2001-10-06T17:51:29+00:00 List-Id: britt@adapower.net (Britt Snodgrass) wrote in message news:<36c6f8dd.0110051506.3fdabae0@posting.google.com>... > dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote in message news:<5ee5b646.0110041038.5c321817@posting.google.com>... > Will having GNAT available as an (optional) part of the > GCC source distrubution GNAT *is* part of the GCC source distribution. What parts you pick up if you do not pick up the whole distribution is up to you. > result is a significantly simpler process for building > cross-compilers to target additional processor families? > I'm thinking of processors such as the AMD 29050 and > StrongARM that have long been supported by the GCC C > compiler but not by the public versions of GNAT. > > Britt Snodgrass No. The process is straightforward from a build point of view with either version of GNAT. Of course the issues of supporting tasking, and the full tool set are completely independent of the build process. Why would you think otherwise? Porting GNAT to a new target is never a trivial task. We usually consider that internally a straightforward Unix port is 6-12 person months with all the necessary tools and testing, and cross ports, or ports to unusual operating systems can be an order of magnitude more. The one thing that having a version of GNAT that is compatible with GCC 3 helps with is that there are some new targets that are only available with GCC 3 (and were not available with GCC 2.8.1), and furthermore some other ports are in much better shape. But that has to do with the version of GNAT you are using, not with whether it is part of the GCC source distribution. Porting GNAT to other than vanilla Unix systems on traditional byte addressable machines is definitely not straightforward. As far as we know the only such port ever achieved outside ACT was Doug Rupp's port to DOS (and Doug now works for ACT -- where he is the primary maintainer of the port of GNAT for VMS - which is certainly the trickiest of all the ports :-) I certainly do not want to discourage people from trying, but on the other hand, it is important to understand the magnitude of the task at least a little bit! Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies