[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:19:51 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
* Peter O'Gorman wrote on Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:47:04PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >Furthermore, f77demo-make fails for the non-static configurations with a
> >./.libs/libmix.so: undefined reference to `MAIN__'
> >while trying to link cprogram. I'm not sure how to fix this, not being a
> >Fortran expert.
>
> Since we only recently started building shared fortran libraries in the
> test, it is meant to skip the f77demo-make test if it fails. That's not
> working?
The testsuite does return SKIP. But obviously the test is not working,
and I'd like to change that. (Even if the failure is known :)
> Anyway whatever object/library contains MAIN__ should have been in FLIBS,
> and we rely on autoconf to figure out FLIBS.
Thanks for this hint. That's what I needed in order to look into it.
First: the Autoconf check thinks no dummy main is needed.
I still need to find out why it does this.
Second: cprogram.c does not make use of the dummy.
The patch below changes that. Compiling cprogram by hand then succeeds
if I use
$ make CPPFLAGS=-DF77_DUMMY_MAIN=MAIN__
Is this patch applicable? Is the idea the right one?
Regards,
Ralf
2004-10-11 Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden>
* tests/f77demo/cprogram.c: Define the F77_DUMMY_MAIN function
if necessary.
Index: tests/f77demo/cprogram.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/libtool/libtool/tests/f77demo/cprogram.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 cprogram.c
--- tests/f77demo/cprogram.c 14 Oct 2003 21:46:13 -0000 1.1
+++ tests/f77demo/cprogram.c 11 Oct 2004 13:16:06 -0000
@@ -16,6 +16,13 @@
#include "foo.h"
+#ifdef F77_DUMMY_MAIN
+# ifdef __cplusplus
+ extern "C"
+# endif
+ int F77_DUMMY_MAIN() { return 1; }
+#endif
+
int
main(int argc, char **argv)
{
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, (continued)
Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/10/06
Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Noah Misch, 2004/10/07
Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Peter O'Gorman, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Albert Chin, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Albert Chin, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Peter O'Gorman, 2004/10/11
- Re: libtool--release--2.0 test results, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/10/12