On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 17:44 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > Hello, > > I am currently annoyed by the gfortran/g77 incompatibilities. Indeed gfortran > has still some regressions with regard with g77, especially some missing > intrinsics. Some are listed in the g77 regressions meta-bug here: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19292 > some are not listed (getarg, imag). > > So there is still a need for g77 to build some code (for example the cernlib > in fedora extras). Now the trouble is that code compiled with g77 and > gfortran are not binary compatible. I have been told that compiling using > g77 with -fno-f2c leads to compatibility with gfortran. Is it the case? > > If it is the case, I think that all the libraries compiled with g77 in > fedora extras (is there any fortran in fedora core?) should be compiled > with -fno-f2c with the issue that all the code to be compiled against > those libraries should also be compiled with -fno-f2c. Does this make sense? Hi Patrice, Thanks for pointing this out! I was aware of the incompatible name- mangling between g77 and gfortran but wasn't aware of the -fno-f2c flag. It does sound like a good idea provided the code generated on either end really is compatible. Could one of the Fedora compiler gurus please step in and say whether this is a good idea or not? Also, for the netcdf-devel package, I've been providing two sets of libs: one compiled with g77 and one with gfortran. I realize that its a bit of an annoyance for a packager but I was trying to do everything I could to make it easy for end users who might still be stuck on g77 for various reasons. Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3@xxxxxxx ed@xxxxxxx URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
