Re: [PATCH] Thread-safe libgfortran PRs fortran/14943 and fortran/21647

[Jerry DeLisle]

Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:20:14AM -0800, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
>
> > Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > This is a merge of the thread-safe libgfortran changes from gomp
> > > branch.  Some discussion about this happened already more than a month ago:
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00121.html
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00148.html
> > > It is just a dependency of GOMP, doesn't depend on it in any other way.
> > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux (and on the gomp branch
> > > it got tested on a bunch of other architectures as well), ok for trunk?
> >
> > Handling of internal array IO has changed some.  We no longer have 
> > get_array_unit_length.  This has been replaced by init_loop_spec and 
> > next_array_record in transfer.c.  These new functions are used in 
> > next_record routines.  Also we changed nml_loop_spec to array_loop_spec in 
> > all of the namelist code.
>
>
> I know.  The patch was originally applied on 2005-10-08 to the gomp branch,
> before those changes.  Then trunk has been merged several times to gomp
> branch and libgfortran changes adjusted.  It has been quite difficult,
> because about every second libgfortran patch caused conflicts, which is
> why I'd like this to be merged ASAP now that 4.1 branched.
>
> So, is what you wrote based just on the changelog entry (the 2005-10-08
> entry has of course been written for the 2005-10-08 patch version)
> or have you seen anything suspicious in the patch?
>
>         Jakub
Yes, I was looking at the ChangeLog at the top of your post here.  Looking 
further down into the patch itself I see that you have the newer items.  So just 
the ChnageLog needs to be updated AFAICT.

Jerry