--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 23:02
---
and 4.2 that is. :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27757
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-30 23:28
---
Fixed on 4.2 only
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-31 05:16
---
I think we ought to scrap this. There is no real point to it,is there?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16465
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-31 05:59
---
Closing.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #57 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-02 00:17
---
Closing. I have regular testing on my list. Last I checked the gcc farm did
not have daily gcc builds going yet. I was keying off that because I did not
want to do my own builds on the garm. I will keep at it
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 03:13
---
This is no longer giving a segfault on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
In file foo.f90:3
subroutine FOO
1
Error: MODULE attribute conflicts with PROCEDURE attribute at (1)
In file foo.f90:4
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 03:28
---
I would like to work on this one. The range check is only looking for ARITH_OK
when it could also see ARITH_UNDERFLOW or ARITH_OVERFLOW.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19310
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-08 01:04
---
Steve,
I was just about to post an RFC to the list because this PR is requesting a
change of philosophy regarding compile time vs runtime behavior. Your comment
about -fallow-inf-nan answers my question. I can
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-08 01:10
---
This bug is related to 19310
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-08 19:14
---
FX, if you want this one, let me know, otherwise I will look into it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-14 00:32
---
My XP box died. I can't do much with this now.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-15 01:31
---
Try changing the C to a !
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28032
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-17 03:32
---
The test case in comment#1 now compiles without error and segfaults when run.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19654
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 06:36
---
Subject: Bug 19310
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jun 18 06:36:45 2006
New Revision: 114752
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114752
Log:
2006-06-18 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 06:42
---
Subject: Bug 19904
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jun 18 06:42:26 2006
New Revision: 114753
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114753
Log:
2006-06-18 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 06:42
---
Subject: Bug 19310
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jun 18 06:42:26 2006
New Revision: 114753
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114753
Log:
2006-06-18 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 06:48
---
Fixed on 4.2
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 06:49
---
Fixed on 4.2
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 21:01
---
I am taking a shot at this.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:37
---
Subject: Bug 19310
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jun 28 05:36:08 2006
New Revision: 115048
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115048
Log:
2006-06-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:37
---
Subject: Bug 19904
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jun 28 05:36:08 2006
New Revision: 115048
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115048
Log:
2006-06-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:40
---
Subject: Bug 19904
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jun 28 05:39:07 2006
New Revision: 115049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115049
Log:
2006-06-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:40
---
Subject: Bug 19310
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jun 28 05:39:07 2006
New Revision: 115049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115049
Log:
2006-06-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:45
---
Fixed in 4.1 now.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:48
---
If anyone else has started on this, let me know.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-28 05:52
---
Fixed on 4.1 branch now.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-02 23:10
---
I can look into this.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #25 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-03 16:41
---
FSEEK should be straightforward (ha ha) I will take a shot at that one.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19292
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-03 23:14
---
Since I do not have access to an F2003 compiler and have not used this feature,
could someone post an example program using this feature that is "known to
work" that I can then use as a working test c
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-04 01:36
---
Subject: Bug 27704
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Jul 4 01:36:31 2006
New Revision: 115168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115168
Log:
2006-07-03 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-04 01:47
---
Subject: Bug 27704
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Jul 4 01:47:26 2006
New Revision: 115169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115169
Log:
2006-07-03 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-12 01:53
---
This is curious. I can confirm the behavior on my system here. If the first
record is made one character less, "1234567", it appears to give a clean
result.
I will have to think about this one a l
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-12 02:14
---
I have the beginnings of a patch now with unformatted read and write working
and formatted write working. Still need to do formatted read and checking of
all constraints. It appears to me that this is
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-12 02:16
---
Fixed on 4.2 only. If someone wants this on 4.1 let me know.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27704
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-14 05:07
---
F95
9.2.2.2 (1)
"Reading and writing records shall be accomplished only by sequential access
formatted input/output statements that do not specify namelist formatting."
F2003
9.3 (9)
"Read
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-13 06:06
---
A patch has been submitted for review.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37294
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 04:33
---
I am on it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:05
---
Subject: Bug 37988
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 05:03:56 2008
New Revision: 141879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141879
Log:
2008-11-14 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:15
---
Subject: Bug 37988
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 05:14:33 2008
New Revision: 141880
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141880
Log:
2008-11-14 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:16
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 14:58
---
Well I managed to read that thread about 90% through without falling to sleep.
One point made there is that gfortran should not reposition the file after a
reopen as the default position= specifier should be
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 19:27
---
Subject: Bug 37294
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 19:25:35 2008
New Revision: 141892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141892
Log:
2008-11-15 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 19:34
---
Subject: Bug 37294
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 19:33:07 2008
New Revision: 141893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141893
Log:
2008-11-15 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 19:39
---
Fixed on trunk. I will open a new PR for enhancement of this to better utilize
the internal unit array by doing fewer "newlines" for namelists.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 20:51
---
As far as I can tell, ASIS is working correctly with gfortran 4.4 and 4.3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38122
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 16:13
---
Subject: Bug 38097
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 16 16:12:16 2008
New Revision: 141919
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141919
Log:
2008-11-16 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 16:20
---
Subject: Bug 38097
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 16 16:18:36 2008
New Revision: 141920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141920
Log:
2008-11-16 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 16:22
---
Fixed on trunk
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 05:03
---
The shifting of the decimal point between 1000. and 1001. is an artefact of how
we compute the format specifiers in the OUTPUT_FLOAT macro in write_float.def.
I am working on a solution to that part of this
--- Comment #29 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 03:02
---
Steve, I will try but we also still have the issue of 38122 as well.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32784
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-20 02:38
---
Sounds like it's fixed.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:14
---
Regarding comment #2. This is exactly the area I have been investigating, but
I don't have anything solid yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38199
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:31
---
Subject: Bug 37472
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Nov 21 04:29:54 2008
New Revision: 142079
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142079
Log:
2008-11-20 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:36
---
Subject: Bug 37472
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Nov 21 04:35:17 2008
New Revision: 142080
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142080
Log:
2008-11-20 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:38
---
The above patch only fixes a portion of this bug. The remaining is I have not
been able to "see" the problem yet. I have access to a solaris machine now,
but have not been able to build gf
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 05:23
---
>From some experiments I have done, we can make substantial improvement by
streamlining next_char. What I have in mind is reading a whole or partial
block of a file and returning a pointer. Then advanc
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 05:21
---
The PENDING= specifier needs to be a pointer to integer. It is used to assign
a logical value of TRUE or FALse to the variable given value.
Thus:
LOGICAL :: alogicalvalue
INQUIRE(10,pending = alogicalvalue
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 05:34
---
I think this is then a dup of 37754. Janne is working some ideas and these are
similar to my thoughts. This fix here is in a high bug domain so we think we
should hold for 4.5, get it resolved and tested, then
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 05:34
---
*** Bug 38199 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 04:37
---
I will see if we can get this cleaned up.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 02:18
---
We did at one time talk about innoculating libgfortran or some such so that the
alignments would be maintained. IIRC We decided not too when it was realized
that we would have to manually adjust every time we
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 02:35
---
I will regression test on x86-64-gnu-linux and approve if it passes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37319
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 05:57
---
Subject: Bug 37803
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Nov 25 05:55:55 2008
New Revision: 142187
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142187
Log:
2008-11-24 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 06:23
---
Fixed on trunk
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 03:53
---
I have been given access to a mchine with this architecture and have not, after
several evenings at it, been able to complete a single build of gfortran. I
notice some instructions on the gcc web page about some
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 03:59
---
Un assigning myself since I think Janne is working on this and I would hate to
duplicate effort. If I need to pick back up on this, let me know.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 04:05
---
Not a gfortran frontend issue, so closing.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 14:20
---
I am on it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 14:21
---
I will see what I can do.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-28 19:58
---
Thanks for report. We have it on the list already and i am working on it.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38285 ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-28 19:58
---
*** Bug 38305 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 02:11
---
Try this:
gdb --args f951 parameter_array_init_3.f90
r
bt
My experiance with this bug is that it segfaults at a place away from where the
actual bug is. This one has been very very elusive.
--
http
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 03:55
---
read( 50, *, pos = 1 )
is valid only if the unit has been connected for STREAM access. F2003
"9.5.1.10POS= specifier in a data transfer statement
The POS= specifier specifies the file position in
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 16:32
---
> So the read statement by itself is invalid.
???
I was testing with and without the open statement in the test case and saw that
we were not catching that error either. Regardless, the problem is that I
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 03:41
---
I meant elusive in the sense that we have not found the actual cause. We are
only seeing a symptom. I have seen a memory leak on x86-64 and segfault on
PPC64-linux. That was quite some time ago.
--
http
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 05:35
---
Patch submitted. There is ABI breakage with 4.3 in that patch I noticed after
I submitted, so I am now testing some tweaks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38291
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-03 04:06
---
Eric,
Here is the problem I am seeing:
gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual -Wold-style-definition
-Wc++-compat -Wmissing
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-04 05:32
---
I am holding off on committing the patch.
With this test case I have found a nasty problem:
! { dg-do run }
! PR38291 Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*
character(15) :: sAccess
character(1) :: instr
open(50
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 04:09
---
Subject: Bug 38285
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Dec 5 04:07:45 2008
New Revision: 142455
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142455
Log:
2008-12-04 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 04:12
---
Subject: Bug 38285
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Dec 5 04:11:28 2008
New Revision: 142456
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142456
Log:
2008-12-04 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:03
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:39
---
The alternating error was an artefact of the test case and not part of the bug.
I have submitted a fixed patch that eliminates the incorrect EOF error. I
will commit soon.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:46
---
That got me farther. Now this:
gnu-make[3]: Entering directory `/home/delisle/gcc/obj44/gcc'
/home/delisle/gcc/obj44/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/delisle/gcc/obj44/./prev-gcc/
-B/home/delisle/gcc/usr/i3
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:15
---
Subject: Bug 38291
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Dec 6 04:13:34 2008
New Revision: 142515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142515
Log:
2008-12-05 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:19
---
Subject: Bug 38291
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Dec 6 04:17:31 2008
New Revision: 142516
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142516
Log:
2008-12-05 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:19
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:34
---
Closing, I do not consider this a bug for reasons stated in comment #1
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 18:43
---
On it
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 19:35
---
This very well could be the ftruncate issue since I did modify the code path.
however, it seems that if these test cases worked before then we are
unnecessarily doing the ftruncate for the pos= code path in
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 21:01
---
I did miss an fbuf_flush. I am not sure why it matters unless it is avoiding
some actual disk operations for us. Try this and let me know.
@@ -2146,7 +2155,10 @@ data_transfer_init (st_parameter_dt *dtp
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 21:54
---
Subject: Bug 38291
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Dec 6 21:53:11 2008
New Revision: 142528
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142528
Log:
2008-12-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-07 01:12
---
Subject: Bug 38425
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Dec 7 01:10:42 2008
New Revision: 142534
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142534
Log:
2008-12-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-07 01:17
---
Subject: Bug 38425
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Dec 7 01:15:46 2008
New Revision: 142535
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142535
Log:
2008-12-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-07 01:18
---
Fixed on trunk:
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-07 20:20
---
The g77 compiler is no longer supported on any platform. Gfortran will compile
the code and works on linux, so you can get a windows version of gfortran at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinaries and it should
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-07 23:58
---
This has been seen before and until now I thought it was an artifact of
valgrind and that the Front end is suppose to set some values. I will see if
we can fix this.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-08 00:52
---
After thinking about it some, I think we should accept with -std=legacy since
it is accepted by g77
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38439
101 - 200 of 3058 matches
Mail list logo
