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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,4ffc4a297a9f10e0 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!a28g2000prb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: deadlyhead Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Thoughts on AdaCore maintaining GCC-incompatible GNAT sources Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:56:05 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <80886810-73e0-4eea-88e3-6653afc2f45b@a28g2000prb.googlegroups.com> References: <62c8c6c1-6578-4e61-b68a-2c192f34aa94@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <1456fbc5-f951-4721-8575-0b73a492f275@r29g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.212.19.235 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1295560566 10712 127.0.0.1 (20 Jan 2011 21:56:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: a28g2000prb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.212.19.235; posting-account=snJuNwoAAABnc8T9lYkBlDQrDdSjOjG2 User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101028 Iceweasel/3.5.15 (like Firefox/3.5.15),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:17562 Date: 2011-01-20T13:56:05-08:00 List-Id: On Jan 20, 1:03=A0pm, Simon Wright wrote: > "Yannick Duch=EAne (Hibou57)" writes: > > We don't in general pay AdaCore to get the latest and greatest; we pay > to get support when we have problems, or need advice, and very good it > is too. > > The project I'm (still, just) working on is stuck with a really old > compiler, for various reasons I don't think I need trouble you with. The > general tendency is to start a project with the latest compiler, > upgrading until some formal customer-visible release point, then freeze; > only moving up to a new release after that when there's a really good > reason to do so. AdaCore are still prepared (a bit grumpily, maybe, > sometimes) to help; but really most of the time it's our understanding > that's the issue. > > As to why we don't copy the latest GNAT Pro to the world -- well, it's > not I who has the contract, it's my employer, and I don't think I'd get > very far trying to persuade the boss to permit the copying. I have no problem, per se, with AdaCore releasing two "versions" of their compiler... in fact, I have no reason top believe that GNAT Pro is any different from GNAT GPL, except for the fact that more _binary_ versions of GNAT Pro are released. It can take a lot of work to create a binary that will work on many systems (thinking of the GNU/ Linux world, the differences between, say, Debian and Redhat (or Ubuntu, for that matter!) are not insignificant), and I understand if AdaCore does not wish to release their "VxWorks hosted on Linux" binary for any and all to use, just to be inundated with emails from hobbyists asking why it's not working for them on GoosebumpLinux- CrazyUnstable. But then again, this is free software. There's absolutely no reason that they should not release buildable _sources_ for said hobbyists to use. We know that there is a community of volunteers out there willing to step up and build on even the most obscure systems (I'm thinking of the GnuAda project, among others) and release their knowledge for the benefit of all. If I could get JGNAT to build, you _bet_ I'd tell everyone how I did it, probably right here on Usenet first. And, if I felt that AdaCore could/would make use of my findings, I would send it to them specifically, in hopes that the next release of sources would include the information, maybe even with their contributions, too. I'm with Ludovic as far as wishing AdaCore would do their development in a public branch of GCC, then merge in Stage 1. I'd love to test and give feedback as development progresses. We'd also be able to test their other technologies at the same time, i.e. pull the latest revision of the gnat-gcc branch to build against the latest revision of GPS, fix any incompatibilities, and submit the patch back to GPS. Less work for AdaCore, better software for the world! I actually can't see any downside to AdaCore developing on a GCC branch. They could release wavefront releases for their paying customers, just as they currently do, but they'd get the benefit of a rapid release cycle with full community input just like the rest of GCC. They could integrate the Debian-style fix for libaddr2line, etc, and stop maintaining their own custom binutils, too, and maintain public sync for all their technologies. How many more people might use Ada if the GNAT technologies were as accessible as the rest of GCC? As for my activities that prompted my original rant, I'll keep working on JGNAT for GNU/Linux, probably attempting to build against GCC-trunk from here on out. If I can get that working, I'll make sure the entire world knows. Also, since I use Debian as my base OS these days, I'd also like to see if I can backport the build to the Debian GNAT sources, in which case I'd approach Ludovic specifically. BTW, I can't stand Java, it makes me feel dirty just to read it, but I am compelled to develop Android apps, hence trying to build JGNAT. I may try binding to the Android NDK at some point, too, but that requires GNAT-ARM crosstools. One project at a time... -- deadlyhead