[multiple changes]

2013-07-08  Hristian Kirtchev  <kirtchev@adacore.com>

	* exp_ch3.adb (Freeze_Type): Generate a
	subpools-related accessibility check only on profiles that
	include the corresponding library unit.

2013-07-08  Gary Dismukes  <dismukes@adacore.com>

	* sem_ch8.adb: Minor typo fixes.

From-SVN: r200757

gcc/ada/ChangeLog

+2013-07-08  Hristian Kirtchev  <kirtchev@adacore.com>
+
+	* exp_ch3.adb (Freeze_Type): Generate a
+	subpools-related accessibility check only on profiles that
+	include the corresponding library unit.
+
+2013-07-08  Gary Dismukes  <dismukes@adacore.com>
+
+	* sem_ch8.adb: Minor typo fixes.
+
 2013-07-08  Javier Miranda  <miranda@adacore.com>
 
 	* sem_ch8.adb (Save_Scope_Stack): Adding documentation.

gcc/ada/exp_ch3.adb

@@ -7284,11 +7284,17 @@ package body Exp_Ch3 is
             --  When compiling in Ada 2012 mode, ensure that the accessibility
             --  level of the subpool access type is not deeper than that of the
             --  pool_with_subpools. This check is not performed on .NET/JVM
-            --  since those targets do not support pools.
+            --  since these targets do not support pools. The check is omitted
+            --  on profiles that lack package System.Storage_Pools.Subpools.
 
             elsif Ada_Version >= Ada_2012
               and then Present (Associated_Storage_Pool (Def_Id))
               and then VM_Target = No_VM
+
+              --  ??? Temporary workaround until restriction No_Storage_Pools
+              --  is implemented.
+
+              and then RTE_Available (RE_Root_Storage_Pool_With_Subpools)
             then
                declare
                   Loc   : constant Source_Ptr := Sloc (Def_Id);

gcc/ada/sem_ch8.adb

@@ -7707,10 +7707,10 @@ package body Sem_Ch8 is
    --    - Extra code was added to verify that all the elements of Elist1
    --      are found in Elist2
 
-   --  This test show that there may be more occurrences of this problem which
+   --  This test shows that there may be more occurrences of this problem which
    --  have not yet been detected. As a result, we replaced that approach by
    --  the current one in which Save_Scope_Stack returns the list of entities
-   --  whose visibility is changed, and that list is passed to Restore_Scope
+   --  whose visibility is changed, and that list is passed to Restore_Scope_
    --  Stack to undo that change. This approach is simpler and safer, although
    --  it consumes more memory.