On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 3:16 PM, David Edelsohn <dje....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:24, Richard Guenther >> <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Which means never, because I think it's a prerequesite for switching? >> >> No. I was not clear. By "done", I meant that GCC builds with C++ in >> all the platforms we can test. >> >> I'm sending a testing plan later today with the list of targets I >> think should be tested. I am expecting to do some adjusting patches >> to get all the targets working. > > I tried bootstrapping on AIX using C++. > > I am able to bootstrap using G++, but not with IBM xlC. xlC is able > to compile the GCC source code (with a lot of warning messages), but > the build fails when the build passes GCC-specific no exception flags > to xlC. > > NOEXCEPTION_FLAGS = -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti > > xlc -c -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti conftest.c > > does succeed, but > > xlc -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti conftest.c > > fails. I don't think -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions does what GCC expects.
Thanks for these data. I think -fno-rtti and -fno-exceptions don't make much sense at the linker level so we should leave them out, and use them only when "compiling", e.g. with "-c". > > Also, I noticed that although GCC is configured with > --enable-build-with-cxx , the configure tests use $CC, which might not > be accurate. that is correct. I suspect a patch for the switch will switch to $CXX. -- Gaby
