Re: [patch] fix PR libfortran/23321

[Thomas Koenig <Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de>]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:26:43PM +0200, Paul Thomas wrote:
> Thomas,
> 
> The patch looks OK. However, I have a problem with the test-case: Unless 
> the print statement is present, it aborts at the next statement.  I 
> cannot, at the moment, see what the problem is.

Paul,

thanks for the pointer to the failing test case.

The testsuite failure has nothing to do with the patch.
I think there is some cleanup issue with library error returns
(specifically, that ioparm isn't cleaned up the way it is supposed
to be on a library exit error).  This merits its own PR.

I have attached a new test case that doesn't expose this error,
plus made another minor correction.  Regression-tested on 4.1.
OK (plus for 4.0, once regression-testing there passes?).

	Thomas

2005-08-25  Thomas Koenig  <Thomas.Koenig@online.de>

	PR libfortran/23321
	* io/transfer.c(data_transfer_init):  Check for a too-large
	record number.  Return if sseek failed.

2005-08-25  Thomas Koenig  <Thomas.Koenig@online.de>

	PR libfortran/23321
	* gfortran.dg/direct_io_4.f90:  New test case.

Attachment: invalid-rec-patch
Description: Text document

Attachment: direct_io_4.f90
Description: Text document