On Tue, 31 May 2016, Stephen Powell wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2016, at 18:25, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > That's indeed the right way to do it (and to fix the issue), but the > > point is that developers using GCC defaulting to z10 or higher
> Hmm. I see two possibilities here. > > (1) The source code package uses a GCC option that specifies that the > compiled object code is to run on a z10 processor. The fix here is > rather simple and straightforward: change the GCC option to specify a > z800/z900, then re-build the package. IBM upstream has moved the 'enterprise' distributions to the even later z196 level about three years ago, via the -march option. They made no secret of their intention to 'end the life' of earlier hardware main-line support, even if it was not well communicated outside of 'enterprise' circles One could speculate why, but ... why bother. Chopping off the legacy tail gets rid of easy conversions and substitution replacement by Hercules rather than zPDT, and so drives more of the remaining 'paying customer' pot either off of Z (to Power, or distributed) -- Russ herrold
