This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc?
- To: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Subject: Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc?
- From: Arnaud Charlet <charlet at ACT-Europe dot FR>
- Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:05:43 +0100
- Cc: Florian dot Weimer at rus dot uni-stuttgart dot de, rms at gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <20001104170450.BA76634D87@nile.gnat.com>
> Unfort8unately the reason we are conservative is that we have not solved
> the tecnhnical problems associated with the use of shared libraries for
> GNARL.
Actually the technical problems have now been solved, and indeed the ACT
binaries come with a shared GNAT library. The difference with the ALT RPMs
is that by default GNAT will link with static libraries because this is
what most of our customers need to distribute/build their application, but
using the dynamic version of the GNAT library is straightforward, it is
simply a matter of specifying the -shared option to gnatbind.
Incidentally, the problems with the shared GNAT library were indeed related to
GNARL as Robert said, but the use of GNARL in the previous post was misleading.
GNARL is the tasking part of the GNAT run time, it is not the entire run time,
as the poster implied, and as many people believe, so I thought it was worth
making this clarification.
Arno