Re: Make f77tests fail on lots of platforms?

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Hi Peter,

Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Okay to apply? :-p

Sure, great catch btw.

Can we make them XFAILs though?  Otherwise we can't roll a distcheck release
until they are fixed... or do you think this constitutes a 2.0 show stopper?
Personally I don't think they do, but I would say that as I don't use fortran.

> Index: ChangeLog
> 2004-09-07  Peter O'Gorman  <address@hidden>
> 
>       Our fortran tests were not very good. All the libraries created
>       were convenience libs, so we did not test the creation of shared
>       libraries on any platform. Also none of the libs used any actual
>       fortran library calls, adding a call to write(*,*) in each lib
>       causes the tests to fail on darwin (and presumably other platforms).
>       These new tests will likely cause many more fortran test failures.
> 
>       * tests/f77demo/foof2.f: New file.
>       * tests/f77demo/foof3.f: New file.
>       * tests/f77demo/fprogram.f: Call routine in new lib.
>       * tests/f77demo/foof.f: Call routine in another new lib.
>       * tests/f77demo/Makefile.am: Make a couple of new libraries, add
>       $(FLIBS) to cprogram LDADD.

Cheers,
        Gary.
-- 
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature