https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=128510
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> --- What makes you think it is spurious though? It perfectly makes sense to me. If GNAT was the only problematic manual, then it would make sense to change it but, given that it is not, I don't see any sufficient reason to change it.
