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-Thread: a07f3367d7,4ffc4a297a9f10e0
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!94.75.214.39.MISMATCH!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?=
 =?utf-8?Q?=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Thoughts on AdaCore maintaining GCC-incompatible GNAT sources
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 07:15:21 +0100
Organization: Ada @ Home
Message-ID: <op.vpo4zvvaule2fv@garhos>
References: 
 <62c8c6c1-6578-4e61-b68a-2c192f34aa94@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
 <1456fbc5-f951-4721-8575-0b73a492f275@r29g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vpl3ipw8ule2fv@garhos> <ih9sfn$6b8$1@news.eternal-september.org>
 <op.vpmee1akule2fv@garhos> <m2d3nrl23g.fsf@pushface.org>
 <80886810-73e0-4eea-88e3-6653afc2f45b@a28g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
 <82k4hyq328.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <ihdoq8$qs9$1@munin.nbi.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xkBtaPlpvhXW66PNZwo+aw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.00 (Win32)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16633
Date: 2011-01-22T07:15:21+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:09:25 +0100, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com=
>  =

a =C3=A9crit:
> Case in point, I recently recompiled Janus/Ada with the current Janus/=
Ada
> compiler (rather than the older baseline compiler). That ended up taki=
ng
> parts of 8 days! And that was with nothing expecting needing change in=

> either the building setup or compiler source.
> [=E2=80=A6]
> Anyway, I'd consider it a miracle if anyone could compile something as=
  =

> large
> as the GNAT sources with anything other than the exact setup they were=

> originally created with. There is just too much chance of running acro=
ss
> some obscure bug otherwise.
I am not sure to understand. I could already built some GNAT binaries  =

without so much trouble, even with some modified setup (I even modified =
 =

some tiny things in some minor parts of the compiler itself at that time=
).

What do you mean by =E2=80=9Cthe exact same setup=E2=80=9D here ? Can yo=
u explain with an  =

example ?

What would be amazing, would be valid sources not compiling (and most of=
  =

GNAT is written in Ada). That sound mysterious.

-- =

Si les chats miaulent et font autant de vocalises bizarres, c=E2=80=99es=
t pas pour  =

les chiens.

=E2=80=9CI am fluent in ASCII=E2=80=9D [Warren 2010]