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 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Bob Broderbund Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Could you write a BSD like os in ADA? Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:55:05 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: <79e591f0-3c3e-42b2-ad1f-3e59a031531e@googlegroups.com> <94756e03-7788-4032-a70b-3a0468fc3af9@googlegroups.com> <2b473012-b01e-4c46-add5-048889bf20df@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: yO51eGMsmM7FenuypAjw8Q.user.gioia.aioe.org X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:31629 Date: 2016-08-28T08:55:05+00:00 List-Id: On 2016-08-28, Simon Clubley wrote: > On 2016-08-28, Bob Broderbund wrote: >> On 2016-08-28, Simon Clubley wrote: >>> On 2016-08-24, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote: >>>> >>>> DEC contracted with AdaCore (then ACT) to provide the DEC Ada-95 compiler. This >>>> is why GNAT recognizes all the DEC Ada(-83) pragmas, such as Passive. >>>> >>> >>> That doesn't mean all the required bits have shown up in the FSF version >>> of the GCC codebase (don't forget AdaCore maintain their own codebase). >> >> I think Mr. Carter probably knows the history pretty well ;-) >> >> But I don't think Adacore has much interest in non-Windows or non-Linux >> platforms in the native target space. They got rid of their Solaris builds >> over the years. Still, I remember a rumor that there is something going on >> for the VMS Intel port at Adacore and it makes sense. It should not be that >> difficult to port the Linux version to VMS _if_ a current gcc toolchain is >> available. If VMS goes all the way with Clang/LLVM and doesn't get an up to >> date gcc going it will be a lot harder. >> > > I have the feeling (but no firm information) that VSI are looking at the > same model that DEC used when DEC contracted AdaCore to supply an Ada 95 > compiler for VMS Alpha. > > IOW, if true, AdaCore would do the port of gcc to VMS x86-64 while VSI > continued with their own compiler toolchain for the other languages. > This would match what happened with VMS Alpha with DEC using their own > compiler technology for the other DEC supplied VMS Alpha compilers. Sure. As long as VSI has hardened the ABI there is no reason that couldn't work. >>> I was able to use the cross compiler to build some C programs which ran >>> on VMS, but Fortran code fell over at runtime either during the image >>> activation process or very shortly afterwards (I can't remember which). >> >> If you post the results maybe I could help, or some of the guys in >> c.l.f. would help. I'm a little surprised anyway. I though the front-end was >> completely Ada and the back end was C/C++. I did not know there was any >> Fortran involved in gnat. >> > > The front end is purely Ada, and there is no Fortran code in GNAT. When > I tried to build the FSF GCC cross compiler on Linux I added multiple > front ends (Ada, Fortran, C, C++) to the --enable-languages option before > reducing the list when the various front ends started falling over. Oh, ok. I suppose you could build gcc without the Fortran support then. > Thanks for the offer BTW, but Fortran was a very low priority goal which > I didn't spend any real time on when I tried this and things went wrong. > My last attempt to build a VMS cross compiler is now getting on for a > couple of years ago so I have moved into other projects now. Purely selfish motives on my part. I like VMS and I like Ada so I would be glad to have a current gnat on VMS. I have some Fortran background so I thought I might be able to help. Now that I understand you meant not that Fortran fell over but gcc's Fortran support fell over I suppose I wouldn't be much help anyway. > >>> Both the C++ and Ada frontends failed to build when building the >>> cross compiler (GNAT fell over with an ICE during the build and C++ was >>> some header problem IIRC). >> >> I suspect a current gcc on VMS is going to be essential. Much code that uses >> gcc exploits every last gccism and does so increasingly all the time. >> > > This was using the latest versions of gcc at the time. The problem here > _appeared_ to be that not all the required bits to build gcc for a VMS > target had been pushed from the AdaCore code base to the FSF code base. I meant I suspect there needs to be the latest and greatest gcc on VMS already or this is going to be very hard. I didn't understand the last part above. Did you mean you do have a current gcc build on VMS after all and it is only the gcc-ada pieces that aren't there? Or did you mean you can't build the latest gcc on VMS for whatever reason? Bob