Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-10-10 Thread Andris Pavenis
On 10/10/2016 06:22 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote: PS. What about last versions of other 2 not yet approved patches (1 and 3)? There have been many back and forth and many updates, so I do not know where we are on these. I'm pretty sure I OKed one of the other parts, but best to resubmit them

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-10-10 Thread Arnaud Charlet
> >> int > >> __gnat_get_maximum_file_name_length (void) > >> { > >>+#if defined (__DJGPP__) > >>+ return (_use_lfn(".")) ? -1 : 8; > >>+#else > >>return -1; > >>+#endif > >> } > >Is the above change really necessary? Would be nice to get rid of this > >extra code. The rest looks OK to

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-10-10 Thread Andris Pavenis
<andris.pave...@iki.fi> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 18:14:52 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] [DJGPP, Ada] Ada support * ada/adaint.c: Include process.h, signal.h, dir.h and utime.h for DJGPP. ISALPHA: include and define to isalpha for DJGPP when IN_RTS is defined. (DIR_SEPARATOR) defin

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-25 Thread Andris Pavenis
On 09/25/2016 09:10 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote: Is the above change really necessary? Would be nice to get rid of this extra code. The rest looks OK to me. It is required for support of environment when LFN support is either not available or disabled for some reason (for example FreeDOS without

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-25 Thread Arnaud Charlet
> >Is the above change really necessary? Would be nice to get rid of this > >extra code. The rest looks OK to me. > It is required for support of environment when LFN support is either > not available or disabled for some reason (for example FreeDOS > without LFN support loaded). Does it matter

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-25 Thread Andris Pavenis
On 09/25/2016 07:25 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote: int __gnat_get_maximum_file_name_length (void) { +#if defined (__DJGPP__) + return (_use_lfn(".")) ? -1 : 8; +#else return -1; +#endif } Is the above change really necessary? Would be nice to get rid of this extra code. The rest looks

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-25 Thread Arnaud Charlet
> int > __gnat_get_maximum_file_name_length (void) > { > +#if defined (__DJGPP__) > + return (_use_lfn(".")) ? -1 : 8; > +#else >return -1; > +#endif > } Is the above change really necessary? Would be nice to get rid of this extra code. The rest looks OK to me. Arno

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-21 Thread Andris Pavenis
. Comment with explanation added in attached version of patch Andris >From 49015a63e708824dbd80fb90520c33b8e1607c43 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andris Pavenis <andris.pave...@iki.fi> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 19:31:54 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] [DJGPP, Ada] Ada support * ada/adaint.c

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-04 Thread Arnaud Charlet
> >This last patch (4/4) contains DJGPP related changes to adaint.c > >(except one which belongs to patch 1/4). This patch is quite intrusive. Are all these changes really needed? > char > __gnat_get_default_identifier_character_set (void) > { > +#if defined (__DJGPP__) > + return 'p'; >

Re: [PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-09-04 Thread Andris Pavenis
, 3 Sep 2016 08:20:14 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] [DJGPP, Ada] Ada support * ada/adaint.c: Include process.h, signal.h, dir.h and utime.h for DJGPP. ISALPHA: include and define to isalpha for DJGPP when IN_RTS is defined. (DIR_SEPARATOR) define to '\\' for DJGPP. (__gnat_get_maximum_file_name_

[PATCH 4/4][Ada,DJGPP] Ada support for DJGPP

2016-07-29 Thread Andris Pavenis
m: Andris Pavenis <andris.pave...@iki.fi> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 20:08:26 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] [DJGPP, Ada] DJGPP support * ada/adaint.c: Include process.h, signal.h, dir.h and utime.h for DJGPP. (DIR_SEPARATOR) define to '\\' for DJGPP. (__gnat_get_maximum_file_name_length): deci