I am using the following gfortran compiler, installed on a 32-bit computer running Open SUSE 10.0: norm@linux:~/design/linux/gfortran/bug32_1/test> gfortran --version GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0 20081021 (experimental) [trunk revision 141258] Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. After submitting this initial report I will upload an archive, bug32_1.tgz. Unpack it and invoke the the shell script contained in file bug32_1.sh. This will reproduce a problem with the compiler. After the script completes you will be able to see the problem by looking at cmndtype.xyz. I see the following: norm@linux:~/design/linux/gfortran/bug32_1/test> more cmndtype.xyz cmndtypeM.f90:697.29: CALL PutALine (user_line) 1 Error: There is no specific subroutine for the generic 'putaline' at (1) cmndtypeM.f90:702.20: CALL PutALine () 1 Error: There is no specific subroutine for the generic 'putaline' at (1) cmndtypeM.f90:705.20: CALL PutALine () 1 Error: There is no specific subroutine for the generic 'putaline' at (1) cmndtypeM.f90:707.29: call PutALine (user_line) 1 Error: There is no specific subroutine for the generic 'putaline' at (1) If I remember correctly, I already submitted this problem with the AMD 64-bit version of the compiler, and you fixed it. Version 4.4 on my 64-bit AMD computer will compile this code. Thanks, as always, for your attention. Norm Clerman
Created attachment 16757 [details] archive described in the initial bug report Pleas see initial bug report.
Your shell script contains items of the form /home/norm/design/numrec/nrTypeM.f90 which of course doesn't exist so the shell script aborts when executed. BTW, if it is fixed on amd64, then it is mostlikely fixed on all target. This is probably too old: GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0 20081021 (experimental) [trunk revision 141258]
(In reply to comment #2) > This is probably too old: > GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0 20081021 (experimental) [trunk revision 141258] > Definitely, the bug is PR37445, which was fixed on 3rd November.
After removing all of your full path names, I get REMOVE:kargl[215] gfc4x WinModI.f90 -c -Wall -O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -std=f2003 -fno-backslash -owinmod.o >winmod.xyz WinModI.f90:68: Error: Can't open included file 'FldSet1A.f90' WinModI.f90:73: Error: Can't open included file 'FldSet2A.f90' WinModI.f90:74.26: There is no FldSet1A.f90 or FldSet2A.f90. REMOVE:kargl[216] find . -name FldSet\* ./FldSet.a90 Any chance you can 1) update to a newer compiler, and 2) cut this down to a much smaller example. PS: This shell script isn't a Bourne shell script. It appears to be a csh script. Add '#! /bin/csh' as the first line.
To add: There is currently a build problem for the linux 32bit version of the gfortran nightlies; thus there has been no newer build since about one month.
Created attachment 16762 [details] updated, and corrected (I hope) archive hello, Sorry for the mixup on the archive. I've attached a new one, bug32_1a.tgz that should work. It's a bash shell. It seems to me that the problem is that you have not been able to build a new 32-bit version since you fixed the problem in the 64-bit version. Do you have any idea when you'll be able to update the former? In any case, let me know when you do. Thanks for your help. Norm
Subject: Re: problem with contained subprocedure. Hello, This appears to be the problem. In any case, I just submitted a new archive file. I hope this one's correct. Thanks for your help. Let me know when the fix has been made to the 32-bit version as well. Norm ---- burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > ------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 16:22 ------- > To add: There is currently a build problem for the linux 32bit version of the > gfortran nightlies; thus there has been no newer build since about one month. > > > -- > > burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu dot > | |org > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38247 > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
(In reply to comment #7) > Subject: Re: problem with contained subprocedure. > > Hello, > > This appears to be the problem. In any case, I just submitted a new archive > file. I hope this one's correct. No... it is not. You're missing files due to: include "addLockBuffer1.a90" and similar. Try to make sure that the testcases you attach reproduce the problem, by testing your testcase ;-) > > Thanks for your help. Let me know when the fix has been made to the 32-bit > version as well. > > Norm > > ---- burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > > ------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 16:22 ------- > > To add: There is currently a build problem for the linux 32bit version of the > > gfortran nightlies; thus there has been no newer build since about one month. > > > > > > -- > > > > burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: > > > > What |Removed |Added > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu dot > > | |org > > > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38247 > > > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > > You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter. >
(In reply to comment #8) > Try to make sure that the testcases you attach reproduce the > problem, by testing your testcase ;-) Marked as waiting for a testcase.
Closing for now, as it's been three months without news from the bug reporter. Please reopen the report and attached a testcase if it's still not fixed.