On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:25 AM, David Edelsohn <dje....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Perry Smith <pedz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One more question on this quest (drifting a little more off topic).
>> In my log files I see a lot of these errors:
>>
>> ld: 0711-768 WARNING: Object
>> ../libsupc++/.libs/libsupc++convenience.a[eh_terminate.o], section 1,
>> function .std::terminate():
>> The branch at address 0x10c is not followed by a recognized no-op
>> or TOC-reload instruction. The unrecognized instruction is 0x0.
>>
>> The build continues and completes. I just want to make sure that I can
>> safely ignore them. Surfing the web, sometimes I see people flag the as
>> errors and other times not.
>
> G++ probably is performing an optimization because the terminate
> function will not return, so I suspect the error message can be
> ignored.
>
> GCC does not always generate completely conformant AIX assembly code
> and the AIX assembler does not always follow the rule to be liberal in
> what it accepts.
>
> The biggest problem is that AIX users of GCC ask questions here and on
> other forums, but do not communicate to IBM AIX Brand executives that
> the GNU Toolchain on AIX is important. The fact that GCC continues to
> function at all on AIX seem to place it in the "out of sight, out of
> mind" category.
>
> If you are a developer or ISV or your company uses GCC on AIX, tell
> your IBM sales representative or executive contact that it is
> important to your business.
I wonder if it might make sense to more strongly suggest to use GNU as
on AIX? The install manual currently says
The native @command{as} and @command{ld} are recommended for bootstrapping
on AIX@. The GNU Assembler, GNU Linker, and GNU Binutils version 2.20
is required to bootstrap on AIX 5@. The native AIX tools do
interoperate with GCC@.
What's the downside of not using the native AIX tools at all (assembler
and linker)?
Richard.
> - David
>
