Build fixes

[ItsPitt]

I got the following tests building and running the without crashing:
./src/lapack/util/app/qutinc/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
./src/lapack/util/app/q2ut/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
./src/lapack/sol/sylv/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
./src/lapack/dec/q/qr2ut/front/flamec/test/flash_sm

I got this testing building, but could not find a replacement for FLA_Apply(). This seems to be causing a run time error.
./src/lapack/util/app/qut/front/flamec/test/flash_sm

[ItsPitt]

No reference to this. However, not having it seems to be causing a runtime issue. Will keep looking into it.

[iotamudelta]

minor stuff

[iotamudelta]

Given that this is the FLA_ALG_REFERENCE path, no FLASH substitution necessary

[ItsPitt]

FLA_QR2_UT was giving an undefined reference. It looks like it was removed at some point. Should this be something other than FLASH_QR2_UT?

[iotamudelta]

Does FLA_QR2_UT_internal work?

[iotamudelta]

interesting that this is not necessary

[iotamudelta]

intentional change?

[ItsPitt]

This is a mistake, will fix

[ItsPitt]

At least, leaving the old line in was. It was complaining about too many args. Since I don't have this test working correctly, I can't verify I removed the correct arg yet. But this gets the test compiling.

[ItsPitt]

I reverted any tests that weren't working as expected. Below I'll list the status of each test. Only one actually worked as expected.

util/app/qut/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
Could not get to run correctly. Was running into issues with FLASH_Apply_Q_UT()

util/app/qutinc/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
Seems to work as expected, here is a sample of the results:
data_qrutinc_( 1, 1:5 ) = [ 384 6.855 0.00e+00 6.397 1.60e-13 ];
data_qrutinc_( 2, 1:5 ) = [ 576 6.869 0.00e+00 6.399 8.60e-13 ];
data_qrutinc_( 3, 1:5 ) = [ 768 6.874 0.00e+00 6.392 4.95e-13 ];
data_qrutinc_( 4, 1:5 ) = [ 960 6.873 0.00e+00 6.381 1.12e-13 ];

util/app/q2ut/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
I got this running, however, the accuracy delta was showing 0. It looked like the FLA_ version was removed at some point. So it was comparing a FLASH_ run to a FLASH_ run and getting 0 difference. I think everything was working on this one, it just did not have a baseline. Because of this, I reverted it.

sol/sylv/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
I got this running. However, the FLASH_Obj_shift_diagonal() implementation seems to have been removed at some point. So when I removed that call to get it running, the accuracy was wildly bad. I could not find a replacement for that call, so I reverted this.

dec/q/qr2ut/front/flamec/test/flash_sm
This is the only one that I really had a question on. I have it running. But the accuracy results seem somewhat high. I'll post below. But I reverted for now.
data_qr2ut_( 1, 1:5 ) = [ 160 4.524 0.00e+00 13.176 3.50e-15 ];
data_qr2ut_( 2, 1:5 ) = [ 240 4.535 0.00e+00 8.627 3.55e-15 ];
data_qr2ut_( 3, 1:5 ) = [ 320 4.610 0.00e+00 6.972 2.32e+01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 4, 1:5 ) = [ 400 4.676 0.00e+00 6.361 2.40e-01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 5, 1:5 ) = [ 480 5.568 0.00e+00 6.580 2.20e-01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 6, 1:5 ) = [ 560 5.563 0.00e+00 6.311 3.46e+01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 7, 1:5 ) = [ 640 5.574 0.00e+00 6.324 3.77e+01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 8, 1:5 ) = [ 720 5.680 0.00e+00 6.130 1.84e-01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 9, 1:5 ) = [ 800 5.709 0.00e+00 5.881 4.30e+01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 10, 1:5 ) = [ 880 5.548 0.00e+00 5.984 4.55e+01 ];
data_qr2ut_( 11, 1:5 ) = [ 960 5.692 0.00e+00 5.882 1.77e-01 ];