This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Propose PR 6160 as high priority
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- To: lucier at math dot purdue dot edu
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 02 17:38:08 EDT
- Subject: Re: Propose PR 6160 as high priority
dino01% gnatgcc --verbose -x ada /dev/null
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib//i386-redhat-linux/2.8.1/specs
This looks *very* suspicious: this is a 2.8.1-based GCC, but your GNATBIND
acts like it was built from a 3.1-based GCC. So it's not surprising they
might be incompatible.
I think the real problem here is that configure should only try GNAT as "gcc",
not "gnatgcc". None of the versions of GNAT distributed by ACT (either
public or customer versions) have ever called themselves "gnatgcc". I have
no idea whether or not whoever put together those versions have tested
them by bootstrapping GNAT sources.
I was against allowing "gnatgcc" originally but was outvoted. I again think
we should eliminate that option: all it seems to do is cause problems.