--- Comment #16 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 10:35
---
Fixed on mainline.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 10:09 ---
Subject: Bug 27740
Author: jb
Date: Tue Apr 24 10:08:52 2007
New Revision: 124098
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124098
Log:
2007-04-24 Janne Blomqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/2
--- Comment #14 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-20 07:45 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01253.html
Also removed the dependency on PR25709 (ISO_C_BINDING), since we don't depend
on that one anymore for this functionality.
--
jb at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #13 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-20 07:45 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 27740
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01253.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #12 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 19:49 ---
> The reason why the patch is in limbo (besides me being busy with real life :(
> )
> is that while it worked fine under Linux, it turned out that it doesn't work
> on
> many other platforms since on those platforms th
--- Comment #11 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 19:05 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> > What happend to this? I can't find the patch in the tracker anymore, but
> > there's no indication in the ChangeLog(s) that is was applied.
>
> The last patch was applied, i.e. gfortran use
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 18:19 ---
> What happend to this? I can't find the patch in the tracker anymore, but
> there's no indication in the ChangeLog(s) that is was applied.
The last patch was applied, i.e. gfortran uses now _gfortran_ prefixes to f
--- Comment #9 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 17:06 ---
What happend to this? I can't find the patch in the tracker anymore, but
there's no indication in the ChangeLog(s) that is was applied. The ML
discussion went somewhat off track after a while. Any indication to pursu
--- Comment #8 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-04 13:02 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 27740
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00194.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #7 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-29 19:32 ---
Yes, this approach is fine by me. Thanks for doing the work.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27740
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-29 14:20
---
Created an attachment (id=12507)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12507&action=view)
Patch implementing namespace separation, to go with symbol versioning
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-29 14:19
---
Hi Janne,
As we've discussed on IRC, the inclusion of the ISO_C_BINDING patch is still
uncertain. For other work (implementation of the IEEE intrinsic modules), I've
felt the need to add an option to gfortran tha
--- Comment #4 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-16 19:09 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Isn't this fixed as Steve bumped 4.2/TRUNK to libgfortran.so.2 ?
>
Umm, no. Symbol versioning is still not implemented. As you can see in the
thread starting from the patch submission, the pat
--- Comment #3 from tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de
2006-08-16 17:44 ---
Isn't this fixed as Steve bumped 4.2/TRUNK to libgfortran.so.2 ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27740
--- Comment #2 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-23 15:59 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg01186.html
--
jb at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-23 09:37 ---
Nice. Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
16 matches
Mail list logo
