http://ave1.org/2018/building-gnat-on-musl-now-with-a-signature/ Tue, 06 Oct 2020 17:04:46 +0000 http://polimedia.us hourly 1 http://ave1.org/2018/building-gnat-on-musl-now-with-a-signature/#comment-136 GNAT Compilation Notes « Ossasepia Mon, 04 Mar 2019 16:53:40 +0000 http://ave1.org/?p=12#comment-136 [...] Ave1's GNAT version 2018-01-17: this uses Adacore's 2016 GNAT only to bootstrap the compilation of a republican GNAT linked against the MUSL C library. Note that the shitgnomes have already messed up some of the links in the scripts there - according to my notes the current scripts fail with a "not found" error at fetchextract http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.9.adacore2016/ gcc-4.9.adacore2016 .tar.bz2 . Obviously, the pill to this is to have everything already downloaded and only then run the script (i.e. no fetch, only extract). [...] [...] Ave1's GNAT version 2018-01-17: this uses Adacore's 2016 GNAT only to bootstrap the compilation of a republican GNAT linked against the MUSL C library. Note that the shitgnomes have already messed up some of the links in the scripts there - according to my notes the current scripts fail with a "not found" error at fetchextract http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.9.adacore2016/ gcc-4.9.adacore2016 .tar.bz2 . Obviously, the pill to this is to have everything already downloaded and only then run the script (i.e. no fetch, only extract). [...]

]]> http://ave1.org/2018/building-gnat-on-musl-now-with-a-signature/#comment-130 PeterL Fri, 22 Feb 2019 15:19:59 +0000 http://ave1.org/?p=12#comment-130 I see a "build-ada.sh", not "ada-build.sh", I am assuming these are the same thing? I see a "build-ada.sh", not "ada-build.sh", I am assuming these are the same thing?

]]> http://ave1.org/2018/building-gnat-on-musl-now-with-a-signature/#comment-45 Building GNAT on MUSL, now with ARM 64-bit support « ave1 Mon, 30 Apr 2018 09:43:55 +0000 http://ave1.org/?p=12#comment-45 [...] update on the previous version. I thought that version already supported ARM 64-bit processors1, but unfortunately it did [...] [...] update on the previous version. I thought that version already supported ARM 64-bit processors1, but unfortunately it did [...]

]]>