I noticed a compilation problem when using openblas-0.3.20-gcc-11.2.1-a3n26so (on Alma Linux) but I don't have the time to investigate further. I am copying the output in case somebody else gets stuck. My workaround was to continue without blas because the problematic functions are defined differently with/without it.
[ 59%] Building Fortran object src/libgimic/CMakeFiles/gimic2.dir/jtensor.F90.o
/opt/gimic/20230210/src/libgimic/jtensor.F90:197:55:
165 | diapam = ddot(vec_size, this%denbf, 1, this%bfvec, 1)
| 2
......
197 | prsp1 = -ddot(vec_size, this%dendb, 1, this%drvec(1, m), 1)
| 1
Error: Element of assumed-shape or pointer array as actual argument at (1) cannot correspond to actual argument at (2)
/opt/gimic/20230210/src/libgimic/jtensor.F90:198:54:
165 | diapam = ddot(vec_size, this%denbf, 1, this%bfvec, 1)
| 2
......
198 | prsp2 = ddot(vec_size, this%denbf, 1, this%d2fvec(1, k), 1)
| 1
Error: Element of assumed-shape or pointer array as actual argument at (1) cannot correspond to actual argument at (2)
/opt/gimic/20230210/src/libgimic/jtensor.F90:205:49:
165 | diapam = ddot(vec_size, this%denbf, 1, this%bfvec, 1)
| 2
......
205 | ppd = ddot(vec_size, this%pdbf, 1, this%drvec(1, m), 1)
| 1
Error: Element of assumed-shape or pointer array as actual argument at (1) cannot correspond to actual argument at (2)
make[2]: *** [src/libgimic/CMakeFiles/gimic2.dir/build.make:194: src/libgimic/CMakeFiles/gimic2.dir/jtensor.F90.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:241: src/libgimic/CMakeFiles/gimic2.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:146: all] Error 2
The first of the problematic functions where the tensor is contracted looks like this
Googling hints that an array element might be passed but then inside the subroutine, there is an attempt to access the whole array. Sadly, I don't have time to take care of it.
I noticed a compilation problem when using openblas-0.3.20-gcc-11.2.1-a3n26so (on Alma Linux) but I don't have the time to investigate further. I am copying the output in case somebody else gets stuck. My workaround was to continue without blas because the problematic functions are defined differently with/without it.
The first of the problematic functions where the tensor is contracted looks like this
Googling hints that an array element might be passed but then inside the subroutine, there is an attempt to access the whole array. Sadly, I don't have time to take care of it.