This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [Patch V2] libgfortran: do not assume libm

From: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini at redhat dot com>
Cc: Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>, Tobias Burnus <tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, Ralf Corsepius <ralf dot corsepius at rtems dot org>, jb at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:57:38 +0100
Subject: Re: [Patch V2] libgfortran: do not assume libm
References: <20120320094857.GB27039@physik.fu-berlin.de> <BB208731-93A2-45B4-95C4-C8179CB4FAC3@adacore.com> <4F6AF98F.1000005@redhat.com>

Paolo Bonzini wrote:

Il 22/03/2012 09:30, Tristan Gingold ha scritto:

Bootstrapped without gfortran regressions on x86_64-darwin.
Ok for trunk ?

(I will submit a follow-up change in libquadmath once this change is approved).

config/
2012-03-22  Tristan Gingold<gingold@adacore.com>

* math.m4: New file.

libgfortran/
2012-03-22  Tristan Gingold<gingold@adacore.com>

	* configure.ac: Use GCC_CHECK_MATH_FUNC for math functions.
	* acinclude.m4: Include ../config/math.m4
	* configure: Regenerate.
	* Makefile.in: Regenerate.

Ok.

I have the feeling that you are still waiting for an expliciat gfortran approval - however, I think that a build maintainer's okay should be sufficient.

Thus, for what it is worth: I believe that patch is okay.

Tobias

References:
- Re: [Patch] libgfortran: do not assume libm
  - From: Tobias Burnus
- [Patch V2] libgfortran: do not assume libm
  - From: Tristan Gingold
- Re: [Patch V2] libgfortran: do not assume libm
  - From: Paolo Bonzini

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]