Bootstrap failure on Linux/x86-64 in Ada

[Paolo Bonzini]

>What is T_ADAFLAGS used for if as you say there is no way to set it globally ?
>  
>
You can set it for gcc/ada only, not for the benefit of the entire 
tree.  It makes it hard, for example, to make libada really its own 
toplevel directory, because T_ADAFLAGS is set within the gcc target 
fragments.

>>I think this is too difficult to clean up, so I am quite inclined to
>>revert this part of the patch.
>>    
>>
>Which part exactly are you referring to ?
>  
>
The part to pass ADAFLAGS down from the toplevel.

>Would there still be a way to specify ADAFLAGS and BOOT_ADAFLAGS if you
>revert your change (that's an important capability that has been broken
>back and forth in the past) for instance ?
>  
>
No, that would probably require a more complex patch, probably using the 
same trick as in EXTRA_GCC_FLAGS.  I don't consider such a patch 
obvious, especially because I don't know myself how to write it, so I 
would ask the build maintainers to come in and say what they think about 
the subject of this discussion.

Personally, I think that the way ADAFLAGS is specified is too 
error-prone.  I understood that Kenner said, -gnatg is necessary on the 
language components, but is actually removing a legitimate warning for 
other files such as the compiler.  I believe that -gnatg should be set 
manually on the files that need it (within gcc/ada/Makefile.in).  
Similarly, -gnatp -gnata should be in some way linked to gcc's 
--enable-checking mechanism.

Since I don't understand really if what I'm saying makes sense, I think 
the best solution is to revert because it is also affecting people that 
use --disable-bootstrap (whom I cannot blame at all).

Paolo