>>> As an alternative, people that don't want multilibbed libada can not use >>> libada altogether. More on this in a second. >> >> Still not clear to me what you mean here. > > I was thinking about using --disable-libada and instead using the "make -C > gcc gnatlib" target. You will get no multilibs but I'm not up-to-date as > to how you build the tools without libada nowadays.
Well, this part requires some manual fiddling, so this would not be very user friendly as a way to 'revert to the previous state', so if it's not too difficult to add a --disable-multilib-libada, I think that'd be preferable, although I won't insist on it if it's too much extra work. Arno
