sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?
- From: Thomas Orgis <thomas-forum AT orgis.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 04:13:28 +0200
Am Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:32:09 +0200
schrieb Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>:
> The spec file is there so that the gcc frontend knows how to compile
> fortran programs (by calling gfortran). This is the same for all split
> gcc spells. In a normal setup where the whole suite is compiled at once,
> the specfile is built at compiletime including all that information.
Well, but obviously _something_ is wrong with our install in that area...
or are you able to compile a .f95 source file without forcing -xf95?
Does automatic preprocessing work for a .F90 file?
(I am aware of not very many people actually using gfortran...)
Alrighty then,
Thomas.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?,
Thomas Orgis, 06/29/2009
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/30/2009
- Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?, Thomas Orgis, 06/30/2009
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/30/2009
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.