LAPACK Archives

[Lapack] Error in compiling Lapack 3.2

Hi, I've tried to compile the lapack package version 3.2 on my win-32 PC using 
the Intel visual Fortran compiler V11 inside Visual Studio 2008, but I've found 
the following errors:

zsyrfsx.f   Line 464 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK   (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zherfsx.f   Line 463 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zherfsx.f   Line 476 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zgerfsx.f   Line 498 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should be WORK not to receive the error)
zgerfsx.f   Line 505 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should be WORK not to receive the error)
csyrfsx.f   Line 464 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK   (propably should be WORK not to receive the error)
cgbrfsx.f   Line 515 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should be WORK not to receive the error)
cgbrfsx.f   Line 522 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should beRWORK not to receive the error)
cposvxx.f   Line 520 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
cposvxx.f   Line 527 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zporfsx.f   Line 457 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zporfsx.f   Line 470 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
cherfsx.f   Line 463 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
cherfsx.f   Line 476 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
cporsfx.f   Line 457 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
csysvxx.f   Line 529 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
csysvxx.f   Line 538 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zhsevxx.f   Line 525 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zhsevxx.f   Line 534 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zsysvxx.f   Line 526 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zsysvxx.f   Line 535 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK  (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)
zcposv.f    Line 214 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument  WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the error)

I've checked the errors and the variables type mismatch exists. Is this a bug 
or must I activate some compiler option in order not to reach this kind of 
errorrs?

Thank you

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://lists.cs.utk.edu/private/lapack/attachments/20090207/46bf7d6f/attachment.htm
 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>


For additional information you may use the LAPACK/ScaLAPACK Forum.
Or one of the mailing lists, or