https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127077
Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #6 from Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #3)
> > > (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #2)
> > > > (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #1)
> > > > > Scanning ChangeLog for a possible commit is challenging
> > > > > at the 'BLOCK' is used in several different way. Anyway,
> > > > > this may have been fixed by 8e28b55c3344
> > > >
> > > > Looking at the associated PR,
> > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79330,
> > > > comment #1 suggests that 8e28b55c3344 has been
> > > > backported to 16.x so this is not the fix.
> > >
> > > pr126127?
> >
> > Likely. I just checked my gfc16 and find
> >
> > hotrats:kargl[401] gfc16 --version
> > GNU Fortran (GCC) 16.1.1 20260624
> >
> > It seems you back ported pr126127 on 07/07/26 to the 16.x
> > branch. I'll update my 16.x, and check the result.
>
> Yep. Updating and rebuilding 16.x branch produces a
> gfortran that can compile the code in this PR.
>
> Harald, do you plan to back port to 15.x branch or should
> this and PR126127 be closed?
I've just backported to fix to 15-branch. Will mark this PR as a duplicate.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 126127 ***
