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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.50.23.75 with SMTP id k11mr3766694igf.3.1423090151651; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 14:49:11 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.33.98 with SMTP id q2mr6628obi.22.1423090151482; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 14:49:11 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!hl2no7322424igb.0!news-out.google.com!db6ni19231igc.0!nntp.google.com!hl2no9785974igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 14:49:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=173.18.241.25; posting-account=HQu3XwoAAACgXAZiVLlGuYCkuhxw8i0w NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.18.241.25 References: <0Kgqw.953330$_k.685364@fx16.iad> <87bnmetex4.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4ae7f0d5-d681-4be9-95bc-b5e789b3ad40@googlegroups.com> <87tx06rve6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <87lhlirpk0.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4984c229-bdcd-4032-bd88-cde66482e6df@googlegroups.com> <6950687c-7b03-440e-ba15-e1092f86a3d0@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <71f976d8-73b2-4bdf-a3ed-a93620276afc@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware From: "Jedi Tek'Unum" Injection-Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 22:49:11 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 3769 X-Received-Body-CRC: 439905699 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24880 Date: 2015-02-04T14:49:11-08:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 1:42:01 PM UTC-6, Simon Wright wrote: > Bj=F6rn Lundin writes: > > On 2015-02-03 23:54, Jedi Tek'Unum wrote: > >> I don't pay for Ada. :-) > >>=20 > >> And so by your reasoning I could have the wonderful walled garden if > >> I paid. I doubt it. > > > > If you do pay for Ada, you could get it for Solaris. > > > > > > > > at least 32-bit I wouldn't take out another mortgage so I could buy it. I'm non-commercial = use and for that they might as well be flipping me the bird. > I built GCC 4.7.0 for Solaris 11 on x86; see > http://forward-in-code.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/building-gcc-with-ada-on-so= laris-x86.html I have 4.9.2 built on Solaris 11.1 x86. Years ago I stepped through several= versions of gcc building up from a really old version that I had. My point isn't that it can't be done but that it takes a lot of effort in g= eneral. I thank Simon for building and publishing it but it is a bit old - = especially the ".0" is scary. Any semblance of "current" requires one to bu= ild their own - and it isn't a drop it in and hit go proposition (typical o= f gcc). The average developer is not going to spend that time to get it run= ning. I briefly tried 64bit but gcc is even more broken there. Solaris isn't a "c= hosen one" for gcc in general, not just Ada. So I have a working Ada on Solaris, and on OSX, and even (thanks to Simon) = an OSX cross to STM32F429I board. Still doesn't cover everything I play wit= h (other ARM, larger AVR [yeh, I know I could get AVR-Ada]). But even if it= did, the expense of time required to repeat this hunter/gather operation e= very couple of years as platforms evolve presents a big barrier to committi= ng applications to it.