GNAT packages in Linux distributions
in [ADA]
|
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) on 9 May 2010 17:30 > That's why I like to hear Randy talking about its compiler Sorry, I was to say âabout *his* compilerâ (shame on me.... I'm not native English you know...) -- No-no, this isn't an oops ...or I hope (TM) - Don't blame me... I'm just not lucky
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) on 9 May 2010 17:34 Le Sun, 09 May 2010 23:26:10 +0200, Ludovic Brenta <ludovic(a)ludovic-brenta.org> a écrit: >> Whatever reasons might be, they aren't good. (:-() > > Oh no? What about top-secret Ada code from the military that triggers a > bug in GNAT? Yes, every one can understand that and probably did think about that while reading your words. However, a patch does not expose any private data, unless you claim some details all over the worlds. I'm pretty sure this is more a matter of GPL vs Pro than a matter of privacy (what privacy may be violated with a bug correction ?) -- No-no, this isn't an oops ...or I hope (TM) - Don't blame me... I'm just not lucky
From: Simon Wright on 9 May 2010 18:44 "Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene(a)yahoo.fr> writes: > P.P.S. I wonder why, being an owner of a GNAT Pro license, you need > the GPL version ? You will get just less with the GPL version. I expect that very few private individuals have a GNAT Pro support contract! When developing open-source software, I wouldn't want to say to potential users such as yourself "my library works fine with GNAT Pro, too bad it doesn't work with GNAT GPL".
From: Ludovic Brenta on 9 May 2010 21:20 Yannick Duchêne wrote on comp.lang.ada: > Le Sun, 09 May 2010 23:26:10 +0200, Ludovic Brenta > <ludovic(a)ludovic-brenta.org> a écrit: >>> Whatever reasons might be, they aren't good. (:-() >> >> Oh no? What about top-secret Ada code from the military that triggers a >> bug in GNAT? > Yes, every one can understand that and probably did think about that > while reading your words. However, a patch does not expose any private > data, unless you claim some details all over the worlds. The discussion was not about patches, it was about bug reports (which often contain reproducers that may be proprietary). The patches eventually make it into the FSF GCC; just look at the changelog. The only problem with this is that there is a delay between the time when the bugs are fixed in GNAT Pro (usually < 1 week after being reported) and the time they are fixed in FSF GCC (up to 2 years, sometimes even more). Not reporting a bug is the only certain way never to see it fixed. Therefore, if you don't have a support contract, report all your bugs. They will get fixed eventually. -- Ludovic Brenta.
From: Ludovic Brenta on 9 May 2010 21:26
I wrote on comp.lang.ada: > Not reporting a bug is the only certain way never to see it fixed. > Therefore, if you don't have a support contract, report all your bugs. > They will get fixed eventually. I might add this: If you do not report a bug, it will never be fixed. If you report a bug, one of several things can happen: - it is already fixed in GNAT Pro: then the fix will be in the next version of GCC and of GNAT GPL. In addition the bug that was hitherto private becomes public and a workaround may be found. - it it not already fixed in GNAT Pro: then it will be fixed in 2 years (usually less, though). A workaround may also be found in the mean time. Either way, nothing bad happens if you report a bug. PS. If you are jobless, you might try working on known compiler bugs and eventually join AdaCore :) -- Ludovic Brenta. |