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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f65d0,bd4d2fccdf730b16
X-Google-Attributes: gidf65d0,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,499ea588f6acabff
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
From: kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner)
Subject: Re: gnat-3.10
Date: 1997/07/11
Message-ID: <5q4367$dd3$1@news.nyu.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 256095006
References: <m2k9jae9dn.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> <dewar.868368838@merv>
 <m22056txii.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net>
Organization: New York University Ultracomputer Research Lab
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.gcc,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1997-07-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <m22056txii.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> Ronald Cole <ronald@ridgenet.net> writes:
>Yes, but should this latest rehash cause any *further* confusion, it
>has been demonstrated that the binary GNAT release for the HP PA-RISC
>is unable to compile two files in the GNAT source release with *any*
>level of optimization.

That's simply not possible since the binary release was constructed by
compiling all the sources files.  There therefore must have been *some*
set of options that compiled them.