gfortran vs ranlib > to octave and gfortran lists

[Paul Thomas]

> | >
> | > OK, I see a way to avoid this limitation in gfortran using standard
> | > f77, but does anyone know if this TODO is expected to be done before
> | > GCC 4.0 is officially released?
> | >

There is a long lived thread on ENTRY in gfortran - see 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13082
I posted the bug, which you will see amongst "Bug xxxxx has been marked as a 
duplicate of this bug." entries, as an outcome of trying to build octave 
using gcc-4.0.  Subsequently, ENTRY was fixed for subroutines but not for 
functions.  I have copied this message to the gfortran list.

> |
> | There is a meta-bug on gcc bugzilla
> | Perhaps this one should be added there as well...
>

Follow the "bug reports" link from the gfortran page 
http://gfortran.org/index.php/Main/HomePage to the bug list and you will 
find ALL gfortran's bugs, including this one.

> setall.f and getcgn.f, but those are subroutines.  Do they compile
> cleanly?  If so, I think the following patch will work around the

Yes they do or,rather, did - I used a similar fix to get past this problem 
and then ran into the snag with duplicated library entries ( libm and 
libgfortran).  I do not think that this is fundamental but just did not have 
the time then to deal with it.

>
> It would be much better for this problem to be fixed in gfortran
> instead of trying to work around it in Octave, so I don't plan to
> apply this patch to Octave's sources unless gfortran is released
> without the fix for this bug.  Let's hope that doesn't happen.
>