* GCC 3.0 released @ 2001-06-18 16:01 Ted Dennison 2001-06-18 17:04 ` Laurent Guerby 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-18 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) I noticed this morning that GCC 3.0 has finally been released. ( see http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.0/gcc-3.0.html ). Does anyone "in the know" have any information about how ACT is comming along with Gnat? It would be nice to have some idea about how much longer the current "two library" situation is going to have to go on. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 16:01 GCC 3.0 released Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-18 17:04 ` Laurent Guerby 2001-06-18 17:41 ` Ted Dennison ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Laurent Guerby @ 2001-06-18 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes: > I noticed this morning that GCC 3.0 has finally been released. ( see > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.0/gcc-3.0.html ). Does anyone "in the know" > have any information about how ACT is comming along with Gnat? It > would be nice to have some idea about how much longer the current > "two library" situation is going to have to go on. At the end of May, Richard Kenner announced June 1st as a possible date for the commit of the GNAT sources into GCC CVS. We're June 18th and still no commit and no further news. I'm on the GCC list and will forward to comp.lang.ada when the commit happens (and ask for volunteers to help packaging/testing on whichever platform people use :). -- Laurent Guerby <guerby@acm.org> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 17:04 ` Laurent Guerby @ 2001-06-18 17:41 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-18 18:08 ` Sune Falck 2001-06-18 18:49 ` VMS/GNAT/GCC-3.x, was: " Simon Clubley 2001-06-18 21:56 ` Florian Weimer 2 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-18 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <86ithtpvmp.fsf@acm.org>, Laurent Guerby says... >and still no commit and no further news. I'm on the GCC list and will >forward to comp.lang.ada when the commit happens (and ask for >volunteers to help packaging/testing on whichever platform people use >:). Cool. I guess the next question then is, are there any good Free Software InstallShield clones for Windows? I've been half-looking for one for the SETI@Home Service for a while now, but it looks as if Gnat will soon be needing one as well. :-) --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 17:41 ` Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-18 18:08 ` Sune Falck 2001-06-18 18:44 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Sune Falck @ 2001-06-18 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <Z2rX6.13247$pb1.484698@www.newsranger.com>, Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> wrote: > >Cool. I guess the next question then is, are there any good Free Software >InstallShield clones for Windows? I've been half-looking for one for the >SETI@Home Service for a while now, but it looks as if Gnat will soon be needing >one as well. :-) Take a look at Inno Setup at http://www.jrsoftware.org/ It is a free and in my opinion a usable and mature piece of software. Sune Falck ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 18:08 ` Sune Falck @ 2001-06-18 18:44 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-18 18:44 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <6srX6.1410$e5.526574@newsb.telia.net>, Sune Falck says... > >In article <Z2rX6.13247$pb1.484698@www.newsranger.com>, Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> wrote: >> >>Cool. I guess the next question then is, are there any good Free Software >>InstallShield clones for Windows? I've been half-looking for one for the >Take a look at Inno Setup at http://www.jrsoftware.org/ >It is a free and in my opinion a usable and mature piece of software. It appears to be Free as well (although the license terms lean disconcertingly towards the BSD side of things). Unless there's something I'm missing, it looks like it ought to be serviceable. To be really safe, itd be nice to have the opinion of a qualified lawyer as to whether it is combinable with GPL'ed and GMGPL'ed code, but I don't think we have that luxury. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* VMS/GNAT/GCC-3.x, was: Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 17:04 ` Laurent Guerby 2001-06-18 17:41 ` Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-18 18:49 ` Simon Clubley 2001-06-18 21:56 ` Florian Weimer 2 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Simon Clubley @ 2001-06-18 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw) On 18 Jun 2001 19:04:30 +0200, in article <86ithtpvmp.fsf@acm.org>, Laurent Guerby wrote: > >Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes: >> I noticed this morning that GCC 3.0 has finally been released. ( see >> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.0/gcc-3.0.html ). Does anyone "in the know" >> have any information about how ACT is comming along with Gnat? It >> would be nice to have some idea about how much longer the current >> "two library" situation is going to have to go on. > >At the end of May, Richard Kenner announced June 1st as a possible >date for the commit of the GNAT sources into GCC CVS. We're June 18th >and still no commit and no further news. I'm on the GCC list and will >forward to comp.lang.ada when the commit happens (and ask for >volunteers to help packaging/testing on whichever platform people use >:). > >-- >Laurent Guerby <guerby@acm.org> Does anyone know if VMS will be supported by ACT in this upcoming release ? I had a look in a GCC 3.0 snapshot from a few days ago, but it's unclear if VMS support is actually in 3.0 itself. There are some command procedures, but no installation instructions that I could find, so these could just be old files. [My interest in Ada is not work related, so I don't know if this has already been announced to the supported customers.] Simon. -- Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.excite.com-Earth.UFP Worrying idea #101: What if Microsoft goes into the Ada compiler business ? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 17:04 ` Laurent Guerby 2001-06-18 17:41 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-18 18:49 ` VMS/GNAT/GCC-3.x, was: " Simon Clubley @ 2001-06-18 21:56 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 6:49 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 20:15 ` Ted Dennison 2 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-18 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw) Laurent Guerby <guerby@acm.org> writes: > At the end of May, Richard Kenner announced June 1st as a possible > date for the commit of the GNAT sources into GCC CVS. We're June 18th > and still no commit and no further news. Yes, that's true. Shall we guess what is causing problems? Legal matters (i.e. the copyright assignment to the FSF)? > I'm on the GCC list and will forward to comp.lang.ada when the > commit happens (and ask for volunteers to help packaging/testing on > whichever platform people use :). I've spotted a few defects in the last public version I need to fix, but before doing that, I'd like to test a more recent version. (Standard answer from report@gnat.com: 'We have already fixed this in the newest release.', and I'd rather avoid duplicating work others have done much more competently. :-/) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 21:56 ` Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 6:49 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 22:44 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 20:15 ` Ted Dennison 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 6:49 UTC (permalink / raw) Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes: >> At the end of May, Richard Kenner announced June 1st as a possible >> date for the commit of the GNAT sources into GCC CVS. We're June 18th >> and still no commit and no further news. > > Yes, that's true. Shall we guess what is causing problems? Robert Dewar has just posted on the GCC list, and he said that ACT is busy releasing 3.14a (?). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-19 6:49 ` Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 22:44 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 23:02 ` tmoran 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 22:44 UTC (permalink / raw) Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes: >> Yes, that's true. Shall we guess what is causing problems? > > Robert Dewar has just posted on the GCC list, and he said that ACT is > busy releasing 3.14a (?). 3.14a1 (note the one). I've completely missed this little extra digit. (I think you can call me Ingrid now.) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-19 22:44 ` Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 23:02 ` tmoran 2001-06-20 1:02 ` Ronald Cole 2001-06-20 20:32 ` Florian Weimer 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: tmoran @ 2001-06-19 23:02 UTC (permalink / raw) >3.14a1 (note the one). I've completely missed this little extra digit. Is there a 3.14p yet? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-19 23:02 ` tmoran @ 2001-06-20 1:02 ` Ronald Cole 2001-06-20 13:39 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-20 20:32 ` Florian Weimer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Ronald Cole @ 2001-06-20 1:02 UTC (permalink / raw) tmoran@acm.org writes: > >3.14a1 (note the one). I've completely missed this little extra digit. > Is there a 3.14p yet? Wait a year. -- Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412 Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> Phone: (760) 499-9142 President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152 My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-20 1:02 ` Ronald Cole @ 2001-06-20 13:39 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-20 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <m3wv686k1i.fsf@yakisoba.forte-intl.com>, Ronald Cole says... > >tmoran@acm.org writes: >> Is there a 3.14p yet? > >Wait a year. That's probably a *smidge* harsh. :-) But the sequence is right. In the past, ACT has released X.YZa releases to all their supported customers before they started worrying about making X.YZp (the "student" release). According to what I read in the gcc mailing list, it looks like 3.14a is a gcc 2.8.1 release, so I would expect 3.14p, when it comes out, to also be a gcc 2.8.1 release. They do hope to have the gcc 3.x (gnat 3.15p?) release out within "weeks" though. Hopefully that'll be less than 20 of them. :-) However, it also appears that they are also hoping to merge the gnat sources into the gcc baseline fairly soon. So theoreticly someone could download those sources and try to put it together themselves earlier. I'm not sure how easy it would be to get it to work though. I'd think there's probably a good reason why it isn't using gcc 3 yet... --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-19 23:02 ` tmoran 2001-06-20 1:02 ` Ronald Cole @ 2001-06-20 20:32 ` Florian Weimer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-20 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw) tmoran@acm.org writes: >>3.14a1 (note the one). I've completely missed this little extra digit. > Is there a 3.14p yet? No, there isn't. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-18 21:56 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 6:49 ` Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 20:15 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-19 22:43 ` Florian Weimer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-19 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <871yohih9w.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>, Florian Weimer says... > >Yes, that's true. Shall we guess what is causing problems? Legal >matters (i.e. the copyright assignment to the FSF)? That can take a while. I'm trying to go through the process with the SETI@Home Service, and its been incredibly slow going. I wouldn't be suprised if the SETI@Home project isn't over before it happens. I think the GNU project doesn't have that many people to deal with this stuff. Perhaps if I go buy some GNU T-shirts they'll get enough of a financial kick to get around to it. :-) But I thought that the Gnat copyrights had been assigned since day 1. I don't have the source distribution handy, but for the WinNT version I have, a cursory check through the source files shows the following copyright holders: Intermetrics (Win32 bindings, *not* GPLed) Florida State University (GNARL stuff) ACT (all the gnat.* packages, except gnat.ads) FSF (everything else) So it does look like most of the stuff in there is already FSF, and I'd guess (just my guess) the rest isn't FSF *on purpose*, and will probably remain that way. Which begs the question (and this is just genuine curiosity), what exactly is going into the official baseline when it gets merged? Will it just be the FSF code? (probably not) Just the GPL'ed code? I guess we'll see when its merged. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-19 20:15 ` Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-19 22:43 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-20 13:57 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-19 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes: > In article <871yohih9w.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>, Florian Weimer says... >> >>Yes, that's true. Shall we guess what is causing problems? Legal >>matters (i.e. the copyright assignment to the FSF)? > > That can take a while. Robert Dewar told me via email that this is not the problem. The copyright was executed years ago, and apparently it is not necessary to assign copyright for the components which are not directly part of the compiler. > I'm trying to go through the process with the SETI@Home Service, and > its been incredibly slow going. Well, it happens quite fast if you've contributed some code to GNU Emacs through some backdoor without signing any document. ;-) OTOH, the copyright assignment stuff really slows down development in some areas. For example, at the moment, our university cannot donate code to the FSF because of legal matters (the assignment contract is completely incompatible with German law). In fact, someone already partly reimplemented a security fix for GNU Emacs because of this problem. As a result, we do not work on improving software (beyond our immediate needs) any more unless contributing something does not require any paperwork. (Forking is not an option of course, because of the additional work required.) > So it does look like most of the stuff in there is already FSF, and > I'd guess (just my guess) the rest isn't FSF *on purpose*, and will > probably remain that way. Yes, I think so. > Which begs the question (and this is just genuine curiosity), what > exactly is going into the official baseline when it gets merged? > Will it just be the FSF code? (probably not) Just the GPL'ed code? The latter is not an option, I think. After all, you need quite a bit of source code which is covered by the ARM copyright in order to be able to compile typical Ada programs. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-19 22:43 ` Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-20 13:57 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-20 20:46 ` Florian Weimer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-20 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <874rtcum4d.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>, Florian Weimer says... > >Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes: >> I'm trying to go through the process with the SETI@Home Service, and >> its been incredibly slow going. > >Well, it happens quite fast if you've contributed some code to GNU >Emacs through some backdoor without signing any document. ;-) To be fair, the phase I'm stuck on isn't really the copyright assignment, its getting blessed as a "GNU project". My first email took 2.3 months to get answered (I'd forgotten that I'd even sent it). The answer asked for more info, which I sent off about 20 days ago... Not that I'm ticked or anything. They have quite limited resources, and I'd much rather see what they do have spent on software development than on paper-pushing staff. >OTOH, the copyright assignment stuff really slows down development in >some areas. For example, at the moment, our university cannot donate >code to the FSF because of legal matters (the assignment contract is >completely incompatible with German law). In fact, someone already It looks like they need some German legal work. Yet another area where I'd rather see them spend their limited resources than on processing my silly request. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-20 13:57 ` Ted Dennison @ 2001-06-20 20:46 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-21 14:14 ` Jacob Sparre Andersen 2001-06-22 17:52 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-20 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> writes: > To be fair, the phase I'm stuck on isn't really the copyright > assignment, its getting blessed as a "GNU project". My first email > took 2.3 months to get answered (I'd forgotten that I'd even sent > it). The answer asked for more info, which I sent off about 20 days > ago... Regarding the 'GNU' label, RMS sent me a few formal requirements (Texinfo documentation, no references to proprietary software, and so on) and told me to ask Robert Dewar for any other details. The GNU Ada Database Environment just started to use the 'GNU' label, without any confirmation... Most GNU software projects do so, it seems. > Not that I'm ticked or anything. They have quite limited resources, > and I'd much rather see what they do have spent on software > development than on paper-pushing staff. Well, this stuff is certainly important, too. Look at the IPFilter confusion for an example of what can happen if things go wrong. With FSF-copyrighted software, I'm confident that it's really free software with a license situation which is not murky. >>OTOH, the copyright assignment stuff really slows down development in >>some areas. For example, at the moment, our university cannot donate >>code to the FSF because of legal matters (the assignment contract is >>completely incompatible with German law). In fact, someone already > > It looks like they need some German legal work. Yet another area > where I'd rather see them spend their limited resources than on > processing my silly request. From a certain point of view, our request is as silly as yours. Quite a few Germans have signed copyright assignments in the past, and now somebody claims that German law explicitly forbids copyright assignment! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-20 20:46 ` Florian Weimer @ 2001-06-21 14:14 ` Jacob Sparre Andersen 2001-06-22 17:52 ` Georg Bauhaus 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Jacob Sparre Andersen @ 2001-06-21 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw) Florian: [ IANAL ] > From a certain point of view, our request is as silly as yours. Quite > a few Germans have signed copyright assignments in the past, and now > somebody claims that German law explicitly forbids copyright > assignment! Assuming that German copyright law is compatible with EU copyright rules, this is likely to be partially true. When Europeans are talking about copyright, they are generally talking about two somewhat different concepts: * The author's right to have his name on his work (and to decide how it may be changed). * The author's right to economic compensation for copying of his work. The former of the two can, as far as I understand EU copyright rules never be transferred. Jacob -- "Filer er r�!" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.0 released 2001-06-20 20:46 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-21 14:14 ` Jacob Sparre Andersen @ 2001-06-22 17:52 ` Georg Bauhaus 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2001-06-22 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw) Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote: : From a certain point of view, our request is as silly as yours. Quite : a few Germans have signed copyright assignments in the past, and now : somebody claims that German law explicitly forbids copyright : assignment! recent news (german) regarding copyright (originator's rights): http://www.bundesregierung.de/dokumente/Artikel/ix_42345_1529.htm http://www.bmj.bund.de/ggv/urhebver.pdf -- Georg --- Microsoft Windows--a fresh perspective on information hiding ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-06-22 17:52 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2001-06-18 16:01 GCC 3.0 released Ted Dennison 2001-06-18 17:04 ` Laurent Guerby 2001-06-18 17:41 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-18 18:08 ` Sune Falck 2001-06-18 18:44 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-18 18:49 ` VMS/GNAT/GCC-3.x, was: " Simon Clubley 2001-06-18 21:56 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 6:49 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 22:44 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 23:02 ` tmoran 2001-06-20 1:02 ` Ronald Cole 2001-06-20 13:39 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-20 20:32 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-19 20:15 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-19 22:43 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-20 13:57 ` Ted Dennison 2001-06-20 20:46 ` Florian Weimer 2001-06-21 14:14 ` Jacob Sparre Andersen 2001-06-22 17:52 ` Georg Bauhaus
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox