[Bug fortran/18918] Eventually support the co-array f95 extension in gfortran

2004-12-21 Thread mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com
--- Additional Comments From mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com 2004-12-21 09:56 --- I agree, but figured it was worth filing away for the future. Here's another doc from cray, the link to which I couldn't find earlier: http://www.cray.com/cgi-bin/swpubs/craydoc30/craydoc.cgi?frames=1html

[Bug fortran/18918] Eventually support the co-array f95 extension in gfortran

2004-12-14 Thread mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com
--- Additional Comments From mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com 2004-12-15 02:52 --- The available information on it is, admittedly, a bit dispersed, but I think http://www.co-array.org/caf_def.htm might be close enough to what you are looking for. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla

[Bug fortran/18918] New: Eventually support the co-array f95 extension in gfortran

2004-12-09 Thread mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com
Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot

[Bug bootstrap/18381] [4.0 Regression] Stage 1 failure in fixincludes, recent CVS

2004-11-10 Thread mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com
--- Additional Comments From mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com 2004-11-10 20:02 --- Same problem building compiler on x86_64 targetted at *mingw* (as opposed to cygwin). -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/16371] [3.4/4.0 Regression] libstdc++ fails for crosses

2004-11-10 Thread mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com
--- Additional Comments From mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com 2004-11-10 21:11 --- Jim, you expressed an interest in this bug a while back, suggesting 1) using sysroot - which I tried, it didn't help anything and 2) looking for an unspecified something in config.log. Can you provide any

[Bug libstdc++/16371] [3.4/4.0 Regression] libstdc++ fails for crosses

2004-11-10 Thread mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com
--- Additional Comments From mg_gentoo at yahoo dot com 2004-11-11 03:45 --- Well, the problem isn't inexperience (in my case anyway) so much as that a process which worked in the past does no longer since the introduction of certain new build magic (for the better, mind you) in 3.4