Package Details: xfoil 6.99-3

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/xfoil.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: xfoil
Description: Program for design and analysis of subsonic airfoils.
Upstream URL: http://web.mit.edu/drela/Public/web/xfoil/
Licenses: GPL2
Submitter: pfm
Maintainer: hiaselhans
Last Packager: hiaselhans
Votes: 4
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2015-09-04 20:52 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2020-12-29 08:00 (UTC)

Latest Comments

Msegade commented on 2022-06-23 08:03 (UTC) (edited on 2022-06-23 08:04 (UTC) by Msegade)

xorg-fonts-misc should be a dependency, if not persent you will get the error "Error of failed request: BadName (named color or font does not exist)"

cwfoo commented on 2021-11-21 12:20 (UTC)

It appears that "xfoil-osmap.patch" doesn't do anything useful. If you grep the xfoil binary to look for "osmap.dat", the only result is "/var/local/codes/orrs/osmap.dat". The only place where "/var/local/codes/orrs/osmap.dat" appears in the xfoil 6.99 source code is in osrc/osmap.f. Are we patching the wrong file? Should we be patching osrc/osmap.f instead of orrs/src/osmap.f?

hiaselhans commented on 2020-12-29 08:06 (UTC)

should be working now...

hiaselhans commented on 2020-12-28 14:22 (UTC)

xfoil compiles with -fallow-argument-mismatch set on lines 30/31 of xfoil-build.patch

+FFLAGS = -O2 $(CHK) $(DBL) -fallow-argument-mismatch
+FFLOPT = -O2 $(CHK) $(DBL) -fallow-argument-mismatch

luccacondratiuk commented on 2020-12-10 14:46 (UTC) (edited on 2020-12-10 14:47 (UTC) by luccacondratiuk)

I got this error, while compiling:


...
ar: a criar libPlt.a
ranlib  libPlt.a
gfortran -c -O2  -fdefault-real-8  ../src/xfoil.f
gfortran -c -O2  -fdefault-real-8  ../src/xpanel.f
gfortran -c -O2  -fdefault-real-8  ../src/xoper.f
gfortran -c -O2  -fdefault-real-8  ../src/xtcam.f
gfortran -c -O2  -fdefault-real-8  ../src/xgdes.f
../src/xgdes.f:554:20:

  540 |        CALL READR(1,ATOL,ERROR)
      |                    2
......
  554 |        CALL READR(2,XRF,ERROR)
      |                    1
Error: Rank mismatch between actual argument at (1) and actual argument at (2) (scalar and rank-1)
make: *** [Makefile_gfortran:175: xgdes.o] Error 1

gasagna commented on 2020-12-02 15:32 (UTC)

Hi,

note that the package does not compile anymore, but raises with a bunch of errors such as

Error: Rank mismatch in argument ‘nbl’ at (1) (scalar and rank-1) ../src/polplt.f:144:40:

144 | CALL POLLAB(NPOL, NAME ,ICOL, ISX,NBL, | 1

The software compiles on debian, so it might be worth looking at what they do and update the patches.

ManyPopes commented on 2016-10-03 16:42 (UTC) (edited on 2016-10-03 18:33 (UTC) by ManyPopes)

I had the same issue, following advice from https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/fortran-read-problems.694191/ I attempted to fix it with this patch: --- Xfoil/src/xpol.f 2010-11-08 22:26:54.000000000 +0000 +++ Xfoil.patched/src/xpol.f 2016-10-03 18:04:34.721030734 +0100 @@ -516,6 +516,7 @@ C C---- the polar dump file doesn't exist, so write new header 60 CONTINUE + REWIND(LU) WRITE(LU) NAME, 'XFOIL ', VERSION WRITE(LU) MINF1, REINF1/1.0E6, ACRIT(1), ACRIT(2) WRITE(LU) MATYP, RETYP but similar problems exist elsewhere. The above fixes the crash when giving a dump filename, but when running ASEQ with PACC enabled a similar crash happens at line 664 of file ../src/iopol.f. I patched that file too, but then another occurance happened back in xpol.f again. I'm not sure how many other times this could also occur in the code. The poster in the forum link above said using a different compiler fixed all of these issues.

neXyon commented on 2016-06-22 21:49 (UTC)

Hi, I tried to use xfoil but failed in doing so. The first problem was during building the package, that .SRCINFO is not up to date with the PKGBUILD (wrong pkgrel). That I could easily fix. Then I ran the program with the following input: NACA 0015 oper visc 1500000 iter 200 mach 0.03 pacc polar.txt aseq 5 30 1 And that's where it crashes (alternatively also when you put a filename for the dump file, where the empty line is). I found a related bug report (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513) but that one is fixed?! I'd appreciate any help. Cheers