[Ada] Patch for ACT resync part 1: trivial changes/formatting

[Laurent Guerby]

Hi Geert, I assume your patch is not yet visible
on the ACT tree, I see some differences between
FSF+your patch (ada-fsf-geert) and ACT (ada-act), eg:

$ head -35 ada-act/5aosinte.adb|tail -10
-- however invalidate  any other reasons why  the executable file  might be --
-- covered by the  GNU Public License.                                      --
--                                                                          --
-- GNARL was developed by the GNARL team at Florida State University. It is --
-- now maintained by Ada Core Technologies, Inc. (http://www.gnat.com).     --
--                                                                          --
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--  This is the DEC Unix version of this package.

$ head -35 ada-fsf-geert/5aosinte.adb|tail -10
-- however invalidate  any other reasons why  the executable file  might be --
-- covered by the  GNU Public License.                                      --
--                                                                          --
-- GNARL was developed by the GNARL team at Florida State University.       --
-- Extensive contributions were provided by Ada Core Technologies Inc.      --
--                                                                          --
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--  This is the DEC Unix version of this package.

$ head -35 ada-fsf/5aosinte.adb|tail -10
-- covered  by the  GNU  General  Public  License.  This exception does not --
-- however invalidate  any other reasons why  the executable file  might be --
-- covered by the  GNU Public License.                                      --
--                                                                          --
-- GNARL was developed by the GNARL team at Florida State University. It is --
-- now maintained by Ada Core Technologies Inc. in cooperation with Florida --
-- State University (http://www.gnat.com).                                  --
--                                                                          --
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or may be there's a glitch in the patch, what is the
target header for GNARL files?


On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 17:26, Geert Bosch wrote:
> On Thursday, Apr 24, 2003, at 02:53 America/New_York, Laurent Guerby 
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 02:45, Geert Bosch wrote:
> >> I will be away next week, so I will not be available for immediate
> >> response/fixes then.
> >
> > Any way volunteer can help the initial merge process?
> >
> 
> Yes, basically look at the "gnat" module at
> cvs -d :pserver:anoncvs@libre.act-europe.fr:/anoncvs,
> and see what patches can be moved over to reduce the
> difference between the two sets of sources. Any prepared/tested
> patch would be more than welcome. 

Unless already done, I'll take care of commiting all
the files present in the ACT tree but not in FSF,
with if possible Makefile fragments to enable them.
Since they are new targets, there's little
risk of breaking anything, I'll check with
a bootstrap on x86-linux, preapproved to commit?

> For larger patches, I'm happy
> to help with testing on various architectures. 

I'll try to address first changes in generic RTS files (a-*, i-*, s-*,
g-*) and tools plus linux-specific RTS files wherever
they look independant of possible compiler changes, will test
on x86-linux with bootstrap + ACATS and submit for review
(unless you preapprove assuming test success).

This leaves the compiler itself where changes are more likely to be
harder to group for non ACT people.

> Note that some files,
> in particular the back end/front end interface, have a gcc-head branch. 
> Use something like cvs co -rgcc-head -f gnat to get the right files.

I've been using this as advised by Arnaud.

> I have been working on a script to automatically extract changes
> including the revision histories and convert them to GCC patches
> and ChangeLog entries. However, I could not solve the main problem
> of deciding the order and grouping of patches. So I'm back to the
> manual process.

I assume ChangeLog can be set to "ACT merge" until the work
is done since everything is there on ACT CVS in case we need it,
afterwards it will be mandatory (and easier) to provide
complete ChangeLog (even for volunteers).

-- 
Laurent Guerby <guerby@acm.org>