NM6.1 on Apple-OSX using g95 compiler

From: Nandy, Partha [PRDUS] Sent: 25 November 2009 15:44 To: nmusers Subject: NM6.1 on Apple-OSX using g95 compiler Dears, We are trying to run NM6.1 on Apple-OSX using g95 compiler. After compiling, when the CONTROL5 test case was executed, we got the following errors. The error msg was the same when we tried other control files. Thanks to Adrian (Dunne), he first brought this problem to my attention. We tried the quick and easy solution of recompiling but that did not solve the problem. Error: ld: warning for symbol _lcm3_ tentative definition of size 368 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/nonmem.a(CFILES.o) is is smaller than the real definition of size 360 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/BLKDAT.o ld: warning for symbol _cm42_ tentative definition of size 16 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/nonmem.a(INITL.o) is is smaller than the real definition of size 8 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/BLKDAT.o ld: warning for symbol _lcm3_ tentative definition of size 368 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/nonmem.a(OFILES.o) is is smaller than the real definition of size 360 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/BLKDAT.o ld: warning for symbol _cm42_ tentative definition of size 16 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/nonmem.a(EIGRS1.o) is is smaller than the real definition of size 8 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/BLKDAT.o ld: warning for symbol _cm42_ tentative definition of size 16 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/nonmem.a(EQRT21.o) is is smaller than the real definition of size 8 from /Users/Shared/nmvi/nm/BLKDAT.o Upon further investigation, Adrian nailed the source of the problem down to the following: The first error message tells us that the common storage area named LCM3 has size 368 in CFILES.OBJ and size 360 in file BLKDAT.OBJ. He then looked at the fortran versions of these files (CFILES.for and BLKDAT.for) and found that in each of them 360 storage locations are set aside for LCM3. My question is why there should be a difference between the storage allocation for the common area LCM3 in the fortran source code and the object code ( I am assuming that the .for and .obj files do in fact correspond with each other)? Is this anomaly driven by the compiler that created the object code? All of the other error messages are similar to the first one and the guess is that if we sort this one out the others will be sorted similarly. Any suggestions from the group will be of great help. Best Regards-Partha