From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4374 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2011 18:26:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 4351 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2011 18:26:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:25:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5TIPkZn029016 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:25:46 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5TIPjlY008391; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:25:46 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5TIPiDj014253; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:25:45 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: GDB Subject: Re: PATCH: PR testsuite/12040: GDB Fortran tests use g77 instead of gfortran References: <20100920135856.GA27953@intel.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (H. J. Lu's message of "Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:52:15 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00466.txt.bz2 >>>>> "H.J." == H J Lu writes: H.J.> gfortran can be used as F77 compiler. Why not just return gfortran H.J.> for f77? No particular reason. I can implement it that way if you feel strongly about it. Tom