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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2fcd8539360f166e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-17 08:24:08 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.easynews.com!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!cyclone.swbell.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Wes Groleau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en,es-MX,es,pt,fr-CA,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GCC 3.1 / Ada / Cygwin / Win2k ? References: <3DAC4528.81F57BBD@despammed.com> <4519e058.0210161111.217a8c6b@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:17:00 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.133.155 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1034867847 151.168.133.155 (Thu, 17 Oct 2002 11:17:27 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 11:17:27 EDT Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29875 Date: 2002-10-17T10:17:00-05:00 List-Id: Pascal Obry wrote: > I think there is confusion here. It uses Cygwin as a tool set to build > GCC/GNAT but is not targetted to Cygwin. The GNAT runtime is using native > (MingW-based) libraries. Ah, soo desu ka. What I have to do is quickly* provide a reliable*, repeatable* way to install a reasonably robust* Ada/C environment. My personal preference is "latest and greatest" but for my "customers" I must provide tools that "get the job done" * quickly => "What do you mean testing? It's been several hours since we asked for that!" * repeatable => No surprises when someone puts it on WinNT and I only tested on Win2K * reliable => They can only screw it up by intentionally not following my instructions * robust => Something that will not inspire misdirected blame against Ada The ideal would be one already built. That gives me time to experiment with building the next one while they get started using this one.