This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Ada files now checked in
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, "dewar at gnat dot com" <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Subject: Re: Ada files now checked in
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2001 13:57:30 -0700
- cc: "drow at mvista dot com" <drow at mvista dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu" <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
--On Saturday, October 06, 2001 09:48:29 AM -0700 Zack Weinberg
> On Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 12:36:55PM -0400, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>> <<That is what happens. This entire argument is about the scenario
>> where there is an Ada compiler but it's not named "gcc".
>> I understand, this is indeed a scenario which ACT has never been involved
>> with, our standard distribution always calls the Ada compiler gcc. We are
>> aware that others have made contrary decisions, and that does indeed make
>> for some extra confusion.
> It's my contention that the FSF tree needs to support a broader range
> of situations than the ACT internal tree does. And I don't agree with
> Richard that this adds an undue amount of complexity to the makefiles.
It doesn't seem problematic to me if you have to download some GNAT
binary from somewhere. To build GCC on Solaris, you have to download
a C compiler binary from somewhere, or build yourself one using a
My two cents,
Mark Mitchell email@example.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com