Re: static FORTRAN compilation set-up in libtool.m4

[Wolfgang Kilian]

Hello,

I may step in here, since I wrote these lines:

The '-Wl,-Wl,,' is NOT a typo.  The current nagfor version 5.2 invokes gcc 
for linking, not ld directly.  Therefore the linker flags have to be 
wrapped twice.  I discussed this with the NAG developers and they agree 
that this was a poor choice which they may change in a future version, but 
we have to live with this for now.  The double wrapper works for me so 
far.  I could not test this on OS other than Linux, however.

I'll try to run the test suite later.

We have implemented quite a few Fortran autoconf macros, in particular for 
testing various Fortran 2003 (and 2008) features, which might be useful 
for the autoconf distribution.  We have tried to stay in line with the 
autoconf conventions, but it might be necessary that an autoconf expert 
looks after this before they could enter the distribution.

Cheers,
Wolfgang

On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

> Hello Juergen,
>
> * Juergen Reuter wrote on Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 09:31:12PM CEST:
> > concerning the flags for the static FORTRAN compilation we would
> > like to ask whether it would be possible to include also a setup for the NAG
> > compiler. As we are using that compiler (versions 5.2, partially 5.1) on 32bit
> > and 64bit Linux, we have added the corresponding part
> >
> >      nagfor*)
> >         # NAG Fortran compiler
> >         _LT_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,-Wl,,'
> >         _LT_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_pic, $1)='-pic'
> >         _LT_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-Bstatic'
> >         ;;
> >
> > in libtool.m4 at line 4041 (version 2.2.10).
>
> Thank you for the suggestion.  I found the compiler manual at
> http://www.nag.co.uk/nagware/np/r52_doc/index.asp
> and I kind of wonder whether the -Wl,-Wl,, in your change is a typo.
> Shouldn't it rather be
>          _LT_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
>
> ?
>
> Also, I would like to ask you to submit test results for this compiler,
> so that we know how well we support it.  If you have version 2.2.10,
> please build and test like this:
>  ./configure F77=nagfor FC=nagfor CC=gcc CXX=no GCJ=no
>  make -k all check
>
> and send all output, plus tests/testsuite.log, gzip'ed.  That way we can
> also fix things that we see are lacking.  You might want or need to use
> FC='nagfor -f95' or so.
>
> If you are interested to help, some of the Fortran macros in Autoconf
> could be improved for nagfor as well, trying to find it, and setting
> some of the flags.  I can cook up a patch if you're willing to test it.
>
> Thanks!
> Ralf