For reasons unkown to me, one of our users attempted to compile a .f90 file using pgf77. I would expect one of two things when this happens - either the compiler tells the user to use pgf90/pgf95, or the compiler is smart enough to figure things out and set the appropriate flags to the back-end compiler anyway.
I believe that PGI is trying to do the latter. However, the error message reported is the following:
$ pgf77 foo.f90
pgf90: LICENSE MANAGER PROBLEM: No such feature exists.
License path: /opt/PGI/pgi_6.1-3/license.dat
FLEXnet Licensing error:-5,412
For further information, refer to the FLEXnet Licensing End User Guide,
available at "> www.macrovision.com> ".
I don’t know why this is a license problem at all. Of course the compilation with pgf90 works as it should. Next, I did the same thing using the -dryrun compiler flag. I did this using the pgf77 and pgf90 front-ends. The output for either case was nearly identical. The only difference was that the output from using pgf90 had this flag in it:
-x 48 3328
I have no idea what it does when it is passed to pgf901 (the back-end) but it isn’t present in the case of using pgf77 to compile, and removing it in the pgf90 case causes the same error message above.
Is this a bug? What is really going on when someone attempts to compile a .f90 file with pgf77?