This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: gfortran, ncar and blockdata_test failures
- From: Walter Spector <w6ws at earthlink dot net>
- To: Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot msbb dot uc dot edu>
- Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:04:45 -0800
- Subject: Re: gfortran, ncar and blockdata_test failures
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=LbdQRR6x1MAGp0UvWlMsPrLkfxwdZWVYWvW3A0W69nyFniXdGIK6v5ia0N5MgOCR; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:X-Mailer:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
- Organization: Not much.
- References: <473EF615.29E59AB3@earthlink.net> <20071117143808.GA13178@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> <473F18B4.DE016B79@earthlink.net> <20071118163015.GA29276@bromo.msbb.uc.edu>
Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> Walter,
> Now I am confused. I hadn't realized that gfortran was passing
> this test passes under linux i386 and x86_64. Does the linux linker
> do something to explicitly make this work or is it just a happy
> accident? Perhaps a radar report could be opened against the Darwin
> linker if we knew what had to be done to fix the issue linker-side.
Hmmm. I tried the test on my redhat system, and like Tobias, the
'bad' case works!
The wierd thing is that ld on my cygwin system is actually more
recent than the ld on my redhat system. (v2.17.50 on cygwin
and v2.15.92.0.2 on redhat.)
Go figure.
W.