Hi Jakub,
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 01:14:51PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> what about trunk then? Right now, cobol still doesn't build there on
>> Solaris/amd64 because 3 patches are missing:
>>
>> cobol: Don't require GLOB_BRACE etc. [PR119217]
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680675.html
>>
>> Still unreviewed.
>>
>> cobol: Initialize regmatch_t portably [PR119217]
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680676.html
>>
>> Unclear how exactly to handle this.
>>
>> cobol: Allow for undefined NAME_MAX [PR119217]
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680682.html
>>
>> Should go for a variant simply replacing NAME_MAX by its Linux
>> <limits.h> value (255) until the whole struct cbl_function_t.name thing
>> can be resolved. Already tested on Linux/x86_64 and Solaris/amd64.
>>
>> libgcobol does build on Solaris (at least on trunk) since
>>
>> commit a619a128c992b2121a862b8470960ae751d25db6
>> Author: Rainer Orth <[email protected]>
>> Date: Mon Apr 21 15:59:14 2025 +0200
>>
>> libgcobol: Check for struct tm tm_zone
>
> I think your patch should go to trunk for now as well and then like for 15.2
> we can gradually extend or remove the whitelists as it is tested on more
> hosts and targets and confirmed to work reasonably well.
fine with me. This way there's no hurry with the other patches for fear
of either breaking the build on non-Linux platforms or impacting COBOL
on Linux.
I'll go ahead with trunk and gcc-15 branch then.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
