Thanks for the responses. But . . .

On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 16:32, Jan Iven wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 10:19 -0500, Luke Scharf wrote:
> > Pann McCuaig wrote:
> > 
> > >Is anyone using g95 (or some moral equivalent) under SL4.x? Thanks for
> > >any pointers (an x86_64 rpm would be real peachy!).
> ..
> > To install g77 on SL4:
> > # yum install gcc-g77
> > (Yum will, of course, ask you if it should install any necessary 
> > dependencies.)

gcc-g77 is installed, but it seems not to like my fortran user's .f90
files.

> You could also use GNU gfortran (rewritten for F95 compliance with
> gcc-4, i.e. really old code may break according to our experience) via
> 
> # yum install gcc4-gfortran

According to the same user, "gfortran is not ready for prime time." Not
having used fortran myself for over 30 years (really!) I'm happy to
defer to his judgement. However, it does compile a .f90 file I tested it
on just fine.

> G95 implements more legacy options and such.
> 
> The G95 binary tarballs are pretty self-contained (and they have a amd64
> version at http://ftp.g95.org/g95-x86_64-64-linux.tgz), by the way. Just
> install into a directory of your choice.

Same user does like G95, but this is what I get (on a box stock SL4.2
x68_64 system):

[pann@alpha ~]$ g95-install/bin/ia64-unknown-linux-gnu-g95 int_sin.f90
-bash: g95-install/bin/ia64-unknown-linux-gnu-g95: cannot execute binary
file
[pann@alpha ~]$ file g95-install/bin/ia64-unknown-linux-gnu-g95
g95-install/bin/ia64-unknown-linux-gnu-g95: ELF 64-bit LSB executable,
IA-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.0, dynamically linked (uses
shared libs), not stripped
[pann@alpha ~]$ uname -a
Linux alpha 2.6.9-22.0.1.ELsmp #1 SMP Thu Oct 27 11:42:46 CDT 2005
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Does the 2.6 vs. 2.4 kernel issue matter? Other ideas anyone? Thanks.

Cheers,
 Pann
-- 
Pann McCuaig <[log in to unmask]>                212-854-8689
Systems Coordinator, Economics Department, Columbia University