Re: [1-800-GIT-HELP] Pushing a merge with master to a branch fails with git gcc-verify
Hi Thomas, at work we usually do not merge master back into a dev branch, but use 'git rebase -i master'. This will so to say stash any commits on the dev-branch, i.e. roll it back, then apply all changes of master and then apply the stashed changes again. This should allow to bypass any server side checks, which I suppose you are hindered now by. To try this you can git reset --hard where commit-hash is the last one from the coarray devel branch you want to keep. Be careful and try this only on a copy of the checkout, because reset hard will drop anything without any chance for easy recovery. - Andre Andre Vehreschild
[Copyright transfer] What to do for copyright transfer to FSF for contracted changes?
Hi, I am a freelancer contracted to fix some bugs in the fortran compiler. I understand that I need to transfer the copyright of that effort to the FSF. My client and me are willing to sign any paperwork needed for that. Unfortunately my client will be on holiday from Thursday on. What do I need to do transfer the copyright of the changes I am contracted to - which partially are already done and in discussion (see for example "PR 60414: Patch proposal" on the fortran and gcc-patches list) and for some to come - to FSF? Sorry, for the bother. I did not find anything on the web besides https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal which is somewhat unclear to me being none-native English speaker. Regards, Andre -- Andre Vehreschild
Re: [Copyright transfer] What to do for copyright transfer to FSF for contracted changes?
Hi, thanks for all your help. I have contact ass...@gnu.org now. Still waiting for a reply though. - Andre -- Andre Vehreschild
Re: New prerequisites to support multi image COARRAY in gfortran
Hi FX, we don't really do. You can use other MPI implementation as well, albeit not all features are implemented in all the others. For failed images support we needed the fault tolerance support for MPI, which I see only in mpich from 3.2 on. The other MPI implementations publicy available do not support ft at the moment. So as soon as they do in their stable versions, we might give the user more choice. - Andre On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 19:44:06 +0200 FX wrote: > > We choose mpich as a default only because it is very stable. > > Why are why tying ourselves to one MPI implementation? > > FX -- Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
Re: RFC: Bugzilla keyword "interp" where it is not clear if a program is standard-conforming or not
Hi all, I don't like the new keyword. Could we do "stdcomp" (for "standard compliant") or something like that? When a keyword allows a question mark, I would even add that, i.e.. like "stdcomp?". Or when we like to go with interp then at least add "std", i.e. "stdinterp". "interp" alone to me is too near to "interpreter" and could collide with searches should there be an interpreter in the gcc suite. Sorry, for the new way in the discussion. - Andre On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 09:00:47 -0800 Jerry D wrote: > On 2/9/25 1:07 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > > Hello world, > > > > looking at a few Fortran bug reports, I found some cases where > > it was not clear if the program in question was standard-conforming > > or not. I would propose to add a keyword for that, tentatively > > called "interp". > > > > Comments? Suggestions for a different name? Should I just go ahead > > and create it? > > > > Best regards > > > > Thomas > > Your suggestion is reasonable and it happens often enough to be useful. > It does not have to be an official interpretation needed necessarily. > Sometimes we resolve these via discussion and comparison to other compilers. > > -- Jerry -- Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
