On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 11:18:22 +0100
Andreas Schwab <sch...@suse.de> wrote:
> > +
> > +# It's early days for COBOL, and it is known to compile on only
> > some host and +# target systems. We remove COBOL from other builds
> > with a warning. +
> > +cobol_is_okay_host="no"
> > +cobol_is_okay_target="no"
> > +
> > +case "${host}" in
> > + x86_64-*-*)
> > + cobol_is_okay_host="yes"
> > + ;;
> > + aarch64-*-*)
> > + cobol_is_okay_host="yes"
> > + ;;
> > +esac
> > +case "${target}" in
> > + x86_64-*-*)
> > + cobol_is_okay_target="yes"
> > + ;;
> > + aarch64-*-*)
> > + cobol_is_okay_target="yes"
> > + ;;
> > +esac
>
> libgcobol/configure.tgt says it's supported on powerpc64le.
Our intention, tell me if you disagree, is that cobol is enabled if
1. --enable-languages=all, and
2. the host and target are "known good", x86_64 or aarch64
or
3. --enable-languages=cobol, and
4. the host and target are "plausible", 64-bit LE.
In the latter case, the user is trying something we haven't, which might or
might not work, and could provide feedback.
As of today there is no 64-bit architecture known not to work. There is only
1) tested, and 2) computera incognita.
--jkl
