Re: GNAT 3.13p build for Solaris 8_x86

[almroth@attglobal.net (Andreas Almroth)]

Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) wrote in message news:<pffjeWzAZDhz@eisner.encompasserve.org>...
> In article <5ee5b646.0107111915.222cebe2@posting.google.com>, dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:
> > almroth@attglobal.net (Andreas Almroth) wrote in message news:<e19796c6.0107110722.24186f28@posting.google.com>...
>  
> >> OK, if you have the time, you could compile 3.13p from 3.12p level,
> >> which is exactly what I have done now... Everything seems to work so
> >> far... It is not verified/certified in any way, but it works for 
> >> me...
> > 
> > OK, good work, it's really not that hard! And for the public version
> > it really does not matter that it is not validated (indeed none of
> > the public versions of GNAT are validated).
> 
> I was under the impression that the validation tests are available to
> all.  If you were to run the tests yourself, some people might not be
> satisfied they were not run by the official testing site ($10,000 a
> pop ?).  But presumable other people, including especially _you_ would
> be satisfied.

Well, they are available for everyone interested at;
http:/adaic.org/compilers/testing.html

But I have found that they are using another naming convention for
source files, than GNAT usually use. I'm sure there is a toolset for
converting it to GNAT naming convention. It is probably easily done
with a simple perl script that reads the package declaration, and then
renames the file accordingly.

Anyway, I don't think I'm really up for this one. A bit too heavy for
a normal programmer... Would be fun though, even though the results
would never count...

If anyone else have done this for GNAT before, that is, having the
ACVC 2.3 ready for GNAT, then I would be more than happy to run it on
my laptop, just for the fun of it...

Meanwhile, I think I will continue on my original work, now that I
have 3.13p working... :)

Cheers,
Andreas