Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 11:02:58 +0200 From: Antal Ritter <antalr@MAIL.DUNAPACK.HU> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gnat for FreeBSD 3.1? Message-ID: <19990625110258.A16842@grumpy.dunapack.hu> In-Reply-To: <199906231743.MAA21290@beowulf.utmb.edu>; from M. L. Dodson on Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 07:43:21PM %2B0200 References: <19990611133324.A11649@grumpy.dunapack.hu> <3764EB75.5BCC06F4@csl.com> <19990616101838.A14390@grumpy.dunapack.hu> <199906161415.JAA86742@beowulf.utmb.edu> <19990623192615.A18196@grumpy.dunapack.hu> <199906231743.MAA21290@beowulf.utmb.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 07:43:21PM +0200, M. L. Dodson wrote: > [...] > Is there easily available source for the patched gcc? If so, you > could maybe just compile it up with the regular gcc, then install > it by hand. That probably won't work as that was probably what > the port was trying to do, and it is known to be broken. I'm afraid the 'patched gcc' should be one that is able to call an Ada compiler. The problem as I see it is that I need a working Ada compiler to make the port, and the only binary I was able to fetch (which is for FBSD 2.2.8) doesn't work, because it needs the aout static libraries. > > Would it be possible to just use a Linux rpm + the Linux > development environment (gag!)? I will try, thanks. I was just thinking there should be a way to produce a working Ada compiler on a brand new installed FBSD 3.1. I'm a bit disappointed because it really seems that I will need to use Linux binaries (I can smell the new problems arising... :-) ) Please correct me if I'm wrong and there *is* a way to avoid Linux binaries. Does it make any difference if I upgrade to 3.2-R or something? Thanks again, Antal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990625110258.A16842>