Lucas,

It could also depend on using ifort 10.0 or 10.1, I guess. With ifort
10.1 I compiled siesta with no hassle, with -O2 and some other
options. It's a shame that intel is so predictable but in a bad
sense...

Marcos

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Lucas Fernandez Seivane
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Yikes, diferent compilers give different bugs. I had not managed to
> get siesta 3 beta to work properly and precisely with ifort 10/11
> except with -g -O0... (I did some tweaking in the Makefile to compile
> with that flags the pseudopotential/basis parts). If anybody is
> suffering the same I can look it up (it may take some time to find the
> old files).
>
> 2010/3/13 Marcos Veríssimo Alves <[email protected]>:
>>> Thank's at all for information.
>>> Do you think that the problem is connected only with
>>> bugs in compiler not with  potential bugs in siesta?.
>>> I mean that maybe intel fortran sees some bugs in siesta (that's why during
>>> compilation some warnings apears)
>>> which cannot see g95 compiler?
>>>
>>
>> No, the bugs are not in siesta. They are rather in the way ifort reads
>> the code and in the way it handles it.
>>
>> Marcos
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lucas Fernández Seivane
> Ph. D. Candidate
> Universidad de Oviedo - CINN
>

Responder a