RE: fortran problems.

Dear Morris,

I have installed netcdf-3.4 on my PC and my PowerPC, both running Linux, using
egcs and g77 without any trouble or patching. If you are familiar with the
RedHat RPM packages, you can save yourself the trouble of doing it yourself:

        ftp://fysvp.phys.uu.nl//pub/redhat/RPMS/i386/netcdf-3.4-3.i386.rpm

Or else do not forget to use:

        CPPFLAGS="-Df2cFortran -DNDEBUG"

Hope this helps ;-)

Richard

On 31-Jul-98 m verlander wrote:
> hello to all.
> 
> hoping that someone might have experience with netcdf running on 
> a linux box.
> 
> all seems well compiling until we do a 'make test'.  it hangs at:
> 
> make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/netcdf-3.4/src/fortran'
> ar cru         ../libsrc/libnetcdf.a fort-attio.o fort-control.o fort-dim.o
> fort-genatt.o fort-geninq.o fort-genvar.o fort-lib.o fort-misc.o
> fort-v2compat.o fort-vario.o fort-var1io.o fort-varaio.o fort-varmio.o
> fort-varsio.o
> ranlib ../libsrc/libnetcdf.a
> g77 -o ftest -O  ftest.o ../libsrc/libnetcdf.a 
> ftest.o: In function `MAIN__':
> ftest.o(.text+0x14): undefined reference to `ncpopt_'
> ftest.o(.text+0x49): undefined reference to `nccre_'
> ftest.o(.text+0xf1): undefined reference to `ncclos_'
> ftest.o: In function `tncacpy_':
> ftest.o(.text+0x302): undefined reference to `ncopn_'
> ftest.o(.text+0x316): undefined reference to `nccre_'
> ......and on.
> 
> linux kernel is 2.0.29 on i486.
> gcc v2.8.1   g77 v0.5.23
> 
> note also, when compiling, reports:
> 
> checking for C-equivalent to Fortran routine "SUB"... sub_
> checking for Fortran "byte"... yes
> checking for Fortran "integer*2"... yes
> checking if Fortran "byte" is C "signed char"... yes
> checking if Fortran "byte" is C "short"... no
> checking if Fortran "byte" is C "int"... no
> checking if Fortran "byte" is C "long"... no
> checking if Fortran "integer*2" is C "short"... yes
> checking if Fortran "integer*2" is C "int"... no
> checking if Fortran "integer*2" is C "long"... no
> checking if Fortran "integer" is C "int"... yes
> 
> should one of these 'bytes' be defined [yes]?
> would really appreciate some help.
> 
> thanks, morris.

---

        e-mail  : Richard van Hees <R.M.vanHees@xxxxxxxxxx>
        date      : 01-Aug-98
        phone   : +31 (0)30 2532978
        www     : http://www.phys.uu.nl/~hees


  • 1998 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the netcdfgroup archives: