Robert Dubner <rdub...@symas.com> writes: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> >> Sent: Friday, April 18, 2025 14:10 >> To: Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> >> Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>; Andreas Schwab >> <sch...@linux-m68k.org>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Robert Dubner >> <rdub...@symas.com>; James K. Lowden <jklow...@cobolworx.com> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] cobol: Allow for undefined NAME_MAX [PR119217] >> >> On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 06:04:29PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: >> > That's one option, but maybe it's better the other way round: instead > of >> > excluding known-bad targets, restrict cobol to known-good ones >> > (i.e. x86_64-*-linux* and aarch64-*-linux*) instead. >> > >> > I've been using the following for this (should be retested for > safety). >> >> I admit I don't really know what works and what doesn't out of the box >> now, >> but your patch looks reasonable to me for 15 branch. >> >> Richard, Robert and/or James, do you agree? > > I agree. At the present time, I have access to only aarch64/x86_64-linux > machines, so those are the only ones I know work. I seem to recall I > originally did it that way; only those configurations were white-listed.
I think you may be mistaken. In r15-7941-g45c281deb7a2e2, aarch64 and x86_64 were whitelisted as *architectures*, but the platform (including the kernel - Linux) wasn't specified. Rainer is reporting an issue with x86_64 Solaris. thanks, sam
