This is the mail archive of the
newlib@sourceware.org
mailing list for the newlib project.
[Fwd: Re: [libgfortran,patch] Add fallback functions tgamma, lgamma, tgammaf and lgammaf]
- From: Tim Prince <tprince at computer dot org>
- To: newlib at sourceware dot org, "fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:22:15 -0800
- Subject: [Fwd: Re: [libgfortran,patch] Add fallback functions tgamma, lgamma, tgammaf and lgammaf]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [libgfortran,patch] Add fallback functions tgamma, lgamma,
tgammaf and lgammaf
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 14:43:44 +0000
From: FX Coudert <fxcoudert@gmail.com>
To: Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org>
CC: fortran@gcc.gnu.org List <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>
References: <Pine.CYG.4.58.0711170922001.956@homepc>
<A89D0A2D-5CA2-4B9A-8F19-D5B47F36C66D@gmail.com>
<473EF7F0.30405@computer.org>
> Do you mean submit a patch to support those functions in newlib?
That's even better, and probably easy now that I've contributed a C
implementation to libgfortran.
>
This subject was brought up a few weeks ago:
http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2007/msg01049.html
Should gfortran configure be set up to avoid relying on newlib for these
functions, or should a patch be submitted to newlib?
It seems most of us are unfamiliar with details of newlib patch submission.