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
