[Pkg-octave-devel] fw: gfortran transition release goal proposal

[Kevin B. McCarty]

On 7/26/07, Christian Holm Christensen <cholm at nbi.dk> wrote:

> If developers write their `configure' script properly, it shouldn't be
> too much of a problem.  The idea is, check for libraries, adding them to
> the `LIBS' variable (AC_CHECK_LIB does that), and at the end you check
> for missing functions (at this point you will link your test against the
> LIBS) and implement them, if any, via replacement code.  Of course, if
> you have two orthogonal libraries, both implementing the fix, you could
> still get into trouble.

Right, that's exactly what I'm concerned about.  It could easily
happen that some user wants to link his/her FORTRAN program against
two independent trees of FORTRAN libraries, e.g. cernlib + MPICH, each
including this hack, and then boom! conflicting getarg_ symbols.

Anyone know offhand if this causes a linker failure (and if there is
any difference depending on whether one or both of the libraries is
linked statically), or if the compiler / runtime linker just
arbitrarily picks one of the two dummy getarg_'s?

-- 
Kevin B. McCarty <kmccarty at princeton.edu>   Physics Department
WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/    Princeton University
GPG: public key ID 4F83C751                 Princeton, NJ 08544