https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #18 from Brian T. Carcich ---
Thanks for the fix and your patience.
We got gfortran with this patch to build on a box running Linux 2.6.9 ca.
November 2011, and it solved the problem.
Well done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #16 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Aug 12 20:09:00 2019
New Revision: 274319
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274319&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-12 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91359
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Wed Aug 7 22:33:27 2019
New Revision: 274201
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274201&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-07 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91359
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #13 from Brian T. Carcich ---
Whoops, I meant rev 274149.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #12 from Brian T. Carcich ---
Steve,
I ran GCC SVN repo rev 274151 against part of our SFTRAN3-generated codebase,
and they now pass the unit tests.
This work will be used to update the MIRAGE suite of software for
high-precision tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #11 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Tue Aug 6 21:32:09 2019
New Revision: 274149
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274149&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-08-06 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91359
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #10 from Brian T. Carcich ---
thank you.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 2:28 PM kargl at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
>
> --- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Against my better judgement, I have submitted a patch that seems to fix this
issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #8 from Brian T. Carcich ---
Not exactly a page out of Dale Carnegie.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #7 from Brian T. Carcich ---
Oh dear.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #5 from Brian T. Carcich ---
S ... as does yours, probably
--- Comment #6 from Brian T. Carcich ---
S ... as does yours, possibly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #5 from Brian T. Carcich ---
S ... as does yours, probably
--- Comment #6 from Brian T. Carcich ---
S ... as does yours, possibly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #4 from Brian T. Carcich ---
PPPS I apologize; by way of ignorant excuse, my history with Fortran goes back
way more than 29y.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 02:37:25AM +, briantcarcich at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> The issue is that this *is* a bug in GFORTRAN.
>
I never claimed that it wasn't a bug.
PS: The name of the compiler is gfor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
--- Comment #2 from Brian T. Carcich ---
Agreed that the options -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic are extraneous;
sorry, they were dragged into here from my Makefile because I need them for the
larger project.
Also, I know how to do a workar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91359
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIR
18 matches
Mail list logo
