Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:03:41 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Volodymyr Kostyrko <c.kworr@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206220903190.26684@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <4FE41288.5020404@gmail.com>
References:  <201206201015.q5KAFKKj026496@mail.r-bonomi.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201353500.24316@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20120620171112.GB23095@hemlock.hydra> <4FE41288.5020404@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> underway to make sure the base system will compile cleanly with both
>> Clang and GCC 4.2+, so I think you're just making up complaints here.
>> Someone (other than Wojciech Puchar, who would just be talking out of his

once again personal attacks  from unhappy childs.

>> ass) correct me if I'm mistaken.
> reported by gcc46 warning
>
> Approved by:    cperciva (implicit)
>
> So at least there are some people working on polishing CURRENT/STABLE up to 
> the point it will build with gcc46.
>
sounds good.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206220903190.26684>