Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[DuckE]

It appears that the non-public version of GNAT 3.14 has been around for a
while now.
I'm curious, will there be a 3.14p (public) release of GNAT?

SteveD

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

"DuckE" <nospam_steved94@home.com> wrote in message news:<2t2r7.26711$QK.21818615@news1.sttln1.wa.home.com>...
> It appears that the non-public version of GNAT 3.14 has been around for a
> while now.
> I'm curious, will there be a 3.14p (public) release of GNAT?


The current plan is as follows. We are going to make 3.14p
available soon. If we cannot find the time to build the
binaries, then at the least we will provide the 3.14p
sources so that others can build the binaries.

This will be the last release in that form. After that,
the GNAT sources will be part of the GCC 3.x release, and
various people will build public releases from these
sources, as happens for GNU C today.

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Florian Weimer]

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:

> This will be the last release in that form. After that,
> the GNAT sources will be part of the GCC 3.x release, and
> various people will build public releases from these
> sources, as happens for GNU C today.

Are there any ideas how to ensure binary compatibility across GNAT
builds from different distributors of the same operating system?

(I've got a draft of a GNU Ada Environment Specification in the attic,
but someone with intimate knowledge of the GNAT technology would have
to proofread it at this point.)

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Ted Dennison]

In article <8766aajjvh.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>, Florian Weimer says...
>
>Are there any ideas how to ensure binary compatibility across GNAT
>builds from different distributors of the same operating system?

Pardon me for a naieve question: What exactly, save a source code modification,
would cause such an incompatability?

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Florian Weimer]

Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes:

> In article <8766aajjvh.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>, Florian Weimer says...
> >
> >Are there any ideas how to ensure binary compatibility across GNAT
> >builds from different distributors of the same operating system?
> 
> Pardon me for a naieve question: What exactly, save a source code
> modification, would cause such an incompatability?

Different sonames for the GNAT run-time library, or a diffent default
threading implementation.

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Ted Dennison]

In article <tglmj03b0c.fsf@mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>, Florian Weimer says...
>
>Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes:
>
>> In article <8766aajjvh.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>, Florian Weimer says...
>> >
>> >Are there any ideas how to ensure binary compatibility across GNAT
>> >builds from different distributors of the same operating system?
>> 
>> Pardon me for a naieve question: What exactly, save a source code
>> modification, would cause such an incompatability?
>
>Different sonames for the GNAT run-time library, or a diffent default
>threading implementation.

I'd say those both qualify as source code modifications. Yeah, the threading bit
can be changed by renaming files, or moving a link or somesuch. But it is the
same issue. If you do any of that, you aren't taking the defaults. Everyone who
builds as per the instructions should get compatable Gnat builds. 

So on to my next naieve question: What exactly is the "nightmare scenario" here?
Say one person has a Linux FSU-threads build, and another has a Linux native
threads build. What bad things are you worried about happening?

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Florian Weimer]

Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes:

>>> >Are there any ideas how to ensure binary compatibility across GNAT
>>> >builds from different distributors of the same operating system?
>>> 
>>> Pardon me for a naieve question: What exactly, save a source code
>>> modification, would cause such an incompatability?
>>
>>Different sonames for the GNAT run-time library, or a diffent default
>>threading implementation.
>
> I'd say those both qualify as source code modifications.

Hmm, I think this term is misleading.  Certainly these build options
do not require source code modification.

Source code modifications are a different beast.  For example, the
symbolic traceback facility in GNAT 3.13p does not work correctly on
most systems if you have compiled your own version of GNAT from the
sources.  Some GNAT distributors apply code fixes (clearly source code
modifications), which hamper binary compatibility.

> Yeah, the threading bit can be changed by renaming files, or moving
> a link or somesuch. But it is the same issue. If you do any of that,
> you aren't taking the defaults. Everyone who builds as per the
> instructions should get compatable Gnat builds.

Maybe this is true.  However, on a GNU/Linux system, the GNAT 3.13p
binary distribution uses a different default threading library than a
straightforward build from the sources.  (Yes, it's documented.)

> So on to my next naieve question: What exactly is the "nightmare
> scenario" here?

Binaries built by the GNAT toolchain, linked against shared libraries
compiled by GNAT (for example, the run-time library), which work only
on a limited number of systems.

> Say one person has a Linux FSU-threads build, and another has a
> Linux native threads build. What bad things are you worried about
> happening?

The GNU C++ ABI fiasco? ;-)

I think there will be problems sooner or later if you are unable to
exchange dynamically linked executables.  (The Debian Policy has
already been adjusted to reflect the GNAT situation of flakey shared
library support, it is now permitted not to use them.)  

People want shared libraries, and will complain loudly if they can't
run binaries compiled on system A on system B, and blame GNAT (and
Ada) if it doesn't work as they expect.  We don't see such problems
yet because most people interested in Free Software written in Ada
don't rely on distributors to get it, they compile it on their own
(GNAT itself is probably an exception), but if this should ever
change, some mechanisms to ensure binary compatibility should already
be in place.

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Dave Parsons]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 00:29:52, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:

> "DuckE" <nospam_steved94@home.com> wrote in message news:<2t2r7.26711$QK.21818615@news1.sttln1.wa.home.com>...
> > It appears that the non-public version of GNAT 3.14 has been around for a
> > while now.
> > I'm curious, will there be a 3.14p (public) release of GNAT?
> 
> 
> The current plan is as follows. We are going to make 3.14p
> available soon. If we cannot find the time to build the
> binaries, then at the least we will provide the 3.14p
> sources so that others can build the binaries.
> 
> This will be the last release in that form. After that,
> the GNAT sources will be part of the GCC 3.x release, and
> various people will build public releases from these
> sources, as happens for GNU C today.
> 
> Robert Dewar
> Ada Core Technologies

I made GNAT 3.13p binary for OS/2 available on unixos2.org
last weekend and would like to put it on ftp://cs.nyu.edu
before the 3.14p sources become available.

Since I could not find any upload instructions on the site,
do you know the procedure or who I should contact?

Dave Parsons

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Ted Dennison]

In article <Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-2RENfSHQe1Zk@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>,
Dave Parsons says...
>I made GNAT 3.13p binary for OS/2 available on unixos2.org
>last weekend and would like to put it on ftp://cs.nyu.edu
>before the 3.14p sources become available.
>
>Since I could not find any upload instructions on the site,
>do you know the procedure or who I should contact?

It would be nice if they took submissions there. But it might be that they want
to reserve that site for official (in the future, source only) releases. 

If that's the case, I'd think that the GNUAda site ( http://www.gnuada.org/ )
would be the natural alternate clearing-house for precompiled GNAT binaries. It
might even be most logical place for the sources too...

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message news:<d%Gr7.2977$ev2.1858@www.newsranger.com>...
> If that's the case, I'd think that the GNUAda site ( http://www.gnuada.org/ )
> would be the natural alternate clearing-house for precompiled GNAT binaries. It
> might even be most logical place for the sources too...


No, the primary location for the sources will be the gcc
site, since the GNAT sources will be part of the FSF
distribution of gcc. Of course anyone can mirror these
sources anywhere they like, but the primary site will
always be the gnu.org site.

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-2RENfSHQe1Zk@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 00:29:52, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:
> Since I could not find any upload instructions on the 
> site, do you know the procedure or who I should contact?

There is no way you can put things at this site, i.e. there
is no direct upload path. Only sysadmins at NYU can put
things there. But point me to the build, and I will arrange
to have it put there. Thanks for this effort!

Source of 3.13p binary for OS/2. (Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?)

[Dave Parsons]

On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 04:00:56, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:

> dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-2RENfSHQe1Zk@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> > On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 00:29:52, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:
> > Since I could not find any upload instructions on the 
> > site, do you know the procedure or who I should contact?
> 
> There is no way you can put things at this site, i.e. there
> is no direct upload path. Only sysadmins at NYU can put
> things there. But point me to the build, and I will arrange
> to have it put there. Thanks for this effort!

You're welcome, thank you for the information and thanks to
all who contributed to the sources which made this possible.

The full URL to the directory is:-
ftp://unixos2.org/pub/unix/devtools/emx+gcc/gnat

and there you will find the compiler binary by myself:-
gnat-3.13p-os2-bin-20010916.zip

and also the documentation converted into OS/2 INF format
by Christian Hennecke:-
gnat-3.13p-docs.zip

If, for any reason you can not find them, let me know and I
will put them on my t-online homepage.

I look forward to testing the build procedure with 3.14p
when it is released.

Dave

Re: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-2RENfSHQe1Zk@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> I made GNAT 3.13p binary for OS/2 available on unixos2.org
> last weekend and would like to put it on ftp://cs.nyu.edu
> before the 3.14p sources become available.
> 
> Since I could not find any upload instructions on the site,
> do you know the procedure or who I should contact?
> 
> Dave Parsons



This port is now available in a contrib directory at
the nyu site. Thanks Dave for this valuable contribution.

Robert Dewar

3.14p Binary for OS/2. Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Dave Parsons]

On Sun, 30 Sep 2001 15:58:57, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:

> dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-2RENfSHQe1Zk@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> > I made GNAT 3.13p binary for OS/2 available on unixos2.org
> > last weekend and would like to put it on ftp://cs.nyu.edu
> > before the 3.14p sources become available.
> 
> This port is now available in a contrib directory at
> the nyu site. Thanks Dave for this valuable contribution.
> 
> Robert Dewar

I have now produced a binary for OS/2 of Gnat 3.14p. Could you
arrange to have this one put on nyu also.

The url is:-
http://dwparsons.bei.t-online.de/gnat-3.14p-os2-bin-20020225.zip

I informed the administrator who took care of 3.13p last week but
have not received a reply yet.  

Thanks,
Dave

Re: 3.14p Binary for OS/2. Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

DWParsons@T-Online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-DfGqQpxjPldQ@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2001 15:58:57, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:
> I have now produced a binary for OS/2 of Gnat 3.14p.
> Could you
> arrange to have this one put on nyu also.
> 
> The url is:-
> http://dwparsons.bei.t-online.de/gnat-3.14p-os2-bin-20020225.zip
> 
> I informed the administrator who took care of 3.13p last week but
> have not received a reply yet.  
> 
> Thanks,
> Dave

Messages like this should be addressed to report@gnat.com
No one from ACT regularly reads CLA, and we don't process
any reports or requests like this from CLA.

Thanks again for this work!

Re: 3.14p Binary for OS/2. Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Dave Parsons]

On Sat, 2 Mar 2002 17:00:53, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:

>
> Messages like this should be addressed to report@gnat.com
> No one from ACT regularly reads CLA, and we don't process
> any reports or requests like this from CLA.
>
> Thanks again for this work!

Ok, thanks. I'll use that address next time.
BTW, is there a better place, newsgroup or mailing list, to
discuss build related problems?

Cheers,
Dave

Re: 3.14p Binary for OS/2. Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

DWParsons@T-Online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-CtYJN6LqSJHN@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> On Sat, 2 Mar 2002 17:00:53, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:
> 
> >
> > Messages like this should be addressed to report@gnat.com
> > No one from ACT regularly reads CLA, and we don't process
> > any reports or requests like this from CLA.
> >
> > Thanks again for this work!
> 
> Ok, thanks. I'll use that address next time.
> BTW, is there a better place, newsgroup or mailing list, to
> discuss build related problems?


My suggestion is to get involved with the work on GCC 3
at www.gnu.org, and work towards getting the latest GCC
port (and GNAT) up and running on OS/2. I don't know who
else might be working on that, but that is the community
interested in build issues, but only with GCC 3. At this
stage GCC 2.8 is not of general interest.

> 
> Cheers,
> Dave

Re: 3.14p Binary for OS/2. Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Robert Dewar]

DWParsons@T-Online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-DfGqQpxjPldQ@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> I informed the administrator who took care of 3.13p last 
> week but have not received a reply yet.  

The 3.14p OS/2 version is now available at cs.nyu.edu

Re: 3.14p Binary for OS/2. Was: Will there be a 3.14p version of GNAT?

[Dave Parsons]

On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 10:41:03, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) wrote:

> DWParsons@T-Online.de (Dave Parsons) wrote in message news:<Ej0w7lFo08Zw-pn2-DfGqQpxjPldQ@jupiter.dwparsons.dialin.t-online.de>...
> > I informed the administrator who took care of 3.13p last 
> > week but have not received a reply yet.  
> 
> The 3.14p OS/2 version is now available at cs.nyu.edu

Thanks, I received confirmation from Bernard this morning.