--- Comment #9 from dennis dot wassel at googlemail dot com 2008-07-08
17:10 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I have remote access to the machine now. Having trouble with gcc build. Not
> forgotton.
I remember our admin talking about needing an updated ld to be able to compile
gcc. Are
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-08 15:50
---
I have remote access to the machine now. Having trouble with gcc build. Not
forgotton.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36689
--- Comment #7 from dennis dot wassel at googlemail dot com 2008-07-02
15:00 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
>
> 2) The system has a broken printf or memory allocation.
>
printf seems to be fine. If I compile and link this snippet of C
#include
void cprint_(float *x) {
printf("with pr
--- Comment #6 from dennis dot wassel at googlemail dot com 2008-07-02
14:39 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> 1) The executable is accessing the wrong version of libgfortran. You might
> need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Nope, everything in order here, as far as I can tell:
isaac:/tmp$ ldd
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-02 14:27
---
To debug this we will probably need to get remote ssh access to a machine like
this. I can think of three possible causes of the problem at the moment.
1) The executable is accessing the wrong version of libgfor
--- Comment #4 from dennis dot wassel at googlemail dot com 2008-07-02
08:54 ---
> (In reply to myself)
> The problem seems to remain the same, regardless of the type of array of XP,
> that is allocatable or fixed-size (compile-time).
> Stupid I didn't check this earlier...
Out of curi
--- Comment #3 from dennis dot wassel at googlemail dot com 2008-07-01
22:55 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Not that it helps much, but on x86-64-linux I cannot reproduce this using GCC
> 4.1, 4.2, 4.3.1 and 4.4.0(of today). Though I agree that the bug is
> irritating.
Same with me, wo
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-01 19:32
---
Do you see the problem if XP is not declared a pointer?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36689
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-01 18:06 ---
Not that it helps much, but on x86-64-linux I cannot reproduce this using GCC
4.1, 4.2, 4.3.1 and 4.4.0(of today). Though I agree that the bug is irritating.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36689
