Hi Kevin, On 2 June 2006 at 11:41, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | On 5/31/06, Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > | > deb-science'rs, | > | > Anybody here who could help me with a Fortran problem? | > | > I cannot compil one (old) routine in the source package fmultivar with | > gfortran: | > | > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/debian/CRAN/fMultivar-221.10065/src$ gfortran -c 46C-OutlierDetection.f | > [...] | > In file 46C-OutlierDetection.f:79 | > | > 18 GOTO (21,22,23,24,25), KSKIP | > 2 | > Error: Label at (1) is not in the same block as the GOTO statement at (2) | > In file 46C-OutlierDetection.f:113 | > | > 25 SUMK=SUMK+FBL | > 1 | > In file 46C-OutlierDetection.f:79 | > [...]
[ I now learned that this file, as well as the R routine calling it, had been removed from the upstream sources right after I took the 'ready for release' tarballs. I have now made a new upload of fMultivar with the updated tarball; this seems to have auto-built fine everywhere (modulo systems that hadn't yet built the new R also uploaded yesterday). In particular, amd64 built it. Good. ] [ I also learned that gfortran-4.1 compiles the file. Also good. ] | > I fudged the original bug (#369003) in debian/rules by compiling this file | > only with f2c, but as two other packages depend on fmultivar (binary: | > r-cran-fmultivar) I now seem to have hit a FTBFS (#369508) on amd64 for one | > of the users of r-cran-fmultivar even though it all works out in pbuilder on | > my i386. Upstream, while notified, has been silent so far ... | > | > Help would be appreciated. | | It's possible that the FTBFS is due to the different ABIs of code | created with f2c + gcc (as well as g77) versus gfortran. As I | understand it, in particular functions that return single-precision Yes, I generally try to move away from f2c. I used to use it for Octave and R, mostly on m68k and arm. R builds everywhere with g77, and now with gfortran. | REAL and COMPLEX values are affected. See the info files for g77 and | gfortran (regarding the -fno-f2c and -ff2c options). From my | experience, at least the ABI change for REAL-returning functions does | not really cause problems for most architectures, but amd64 is | particularly sensitive to it for some reason - see | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15397 | | Is there a reason it's necessary for you to use gfortran instead of | g77? IMO it would be best for the project to switch from g77 to As I understand it, gcc-4.0 is the default compiler, and gcc-4.1 will be the default compiler soon. Unless I'm mistaken, neither one provides g77. Sp gfortran it is by default. Or do I have that wrong? | gfortran in a single coordinated transition, as with the g++ ABI | changes, in order to minimize ABI incompatibilities between | FORTRAN-based libraries. I commented on this at one point, | http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2005/09/msg00071.html | but my email received relatively little attention. Sort-of shows that few DDer care about Fortran ... Thanks for the follow-up, Dirk -- Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. -- Thomas A. Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
