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: 103376,fee1c99f4df8c011,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Subject: Re: GNAT extensions, recompilation (was Re: what DOES the GPL...) Date: 1997/08/25 Message-ID: <5tql89$b90$1@news.nyu.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 268420170 References: <5tp162$rg9$1@trumpet.uni-mannheim.de> Organization: New York University Ultracomputer Research Lab Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-08-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <5tp162$rg9$1@trumpet.uni-mannheim.de> mw@ipx2.rz.uni-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz) writes: >Robert Dewar wrote: >> Actually it would be very nice if there was more experimental activity >> with GNAT in terms of interesting new experimental ideas, but so far >> we haven't seen much of this -- hopefully we will see more in the future, >> this is after all why the sources are available > >If my memory doesn't fool me, and I didn't misunderstand what you meant, >you've recently stated (here or on chat) that you wouldn't consider the >ability of non-customers to recompile the public releases very important, >since you'd expect people to use the binary releases. > >Above you've already mentioned one yourself: Unless everyone trying to extend >(or in some other way experiment with the internals of) GNAT is a customer, >there should be a reasonable confidence that one will be able to re-apply >one's modifications to further releases (obviously, with changes necessary >for the new release). Right, but the point is that anybody with enough knowlege to usefully do work in experimenting with GNAT extensions will have had to have formed enough knowlege to know how to properly compile it, which, as you know, is only a straighforward process if you understand what's going on. >Another reason is that there may be patches to GCC which one considers very >important for one's platform, and which one therefore wants to be part of the >GNAT version one is using, without depending on updates from whoever provides >the binary releases. This is actually a good reason *not* to support the building of GNAT from sources since there is no assurance that those "important patches to GCC" will work properly with GNAT. There are quite a number of patch sets to GCC out there. Some will work with GNAT and some will likely not, but there is nobody who reliably knows which are in which category. Somebody who tries something like this is most assuredly on their own!