Re: PING Re: [PATCH] gfortran testsuite: implicitly cleanup-modules, part 2

2012-04-13 Thread Mike Stump
On Apr 13, 2012, at 7:39 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 06:57:44AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Apr 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >>> Ping. >> >> Before advancing, has the problem that Rainer pointed out on March 19th with >> your earlier p

Re: PING Re: [PATCH] gfortran testsuite: implicitly cleanup-modules, part 2

2012-04-13 Thread Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 06:57:44AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: >On Apr 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >> Ping. > >Before advancing, has the problem that Rainer pointed out on March 19th with >your earlier patch been fixed? I believe that it is fixed, yes. See r185688 and my fo

Re: [PATCH] gfortran testsuite: implicitly cleanup-modules, part 2

2012-04-13 Thread Mike Stump
On Apr 3, 2012, at 5:16 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > The second part of implicitly doing cleanup-modules is to remove the now > superfluous dg-final directives. Ok once the issue Rainer pointed out is addressed. As for the ChangeLog, I'd be tempted to list them as: * gfortran.d

Re: PING Re: [PATCH] gfortran testsuite: implicitly cleanup-modules, part 2

2012-04-13 Thread Mike Stump
On Apr 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > Ping. Before advancing, has the problem that Rainer pointed out on March 19th with your earlier patch been fixed?