From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 4 07:51:18 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1C516A4CF; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 07:51:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.89]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D48043D1F; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 07:51:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chat95@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin01-en2 [10.13.10.146]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id j247pIq2028352; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (qclgw.qcl.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp [133.11.70.190]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin01/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id j247pBcP010013; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:51:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:51:01 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20050304.165101.424241247.chat95@mac.com> To: obrien@FreeBSD.org From: NAKATA Maho In-Reply-To: <20050303194307.GA16309@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20050303063945.GA3179@dragon.nuxi.com> <20050303.155754.343188241.chat95@mac.com> <20050303194307.GA16309@dragon.nuxi.com> Organization: private X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on XEmacs 21.4.16 (Corporate Culture) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/gcc40 Makefile distinfo pkg-plist X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 07:51:18 -0000 In Message-ID: <20050303194307.GA16309@dragon.nuxi.com> David O'Brien wrote: Hello, O'Brien, My stand point is: I'm glad to remove lang/gfortran to reduce the cost we maintain if lang/gcc40 build gfortran by default. > I know exactly what is in the port Makefile right now and how 'gfortran' > is built. Thanks. This is historical reason. I'm second to having Fortran in base system, and as you know, I'm maintaining several ports in science, biology, and math so that doing scientific computation. Unfortunately we don't have free Fortran 90/95, the reason why I made this port was there was no FREE Fortran 90/95 in the ports (but we already have lang/ifc). Archives of lang/gfortran was taken from somewhere who maintains this, (at that time we didn't have gcc-40 port even snapshot version or not integrated so that we must manually checked out from cvs, so this should be a separate port) and last year (maybe), this was integrated in the trunk (also maybe) of gcc. recently snapshot of gfortran is also available, so I asked gerald to have gfortran in gcc40 port as well. We discussed and finally I agreed with him by adding WITH_FORTRAN knob for same reason - not so many persons want fortran - Nevertheless, I personally want gfortran, I overwrite Makefile of lang/gfortran to merely having WITH_FORTRAN=yes to keep this alive (and having better up-to-date one). otherwise, it is impossible to have ports that requires Fortran90/95. BTW: I tried several times gfrotran before, but it is slow, and has compilation problems and seems to have bugs. > > Only Fortran depends on external library at that time, > > and needs configure args as well. This configure line should be removed, > > because IMHO gcc should build without external dependency. > > No, GCC also has an external dependancy -- libiconv. We also have a > configure arg for it: --with-libiconv-prefix=${LOCALBASE}. Thanks, I missed this point. So what we should do ask gerald to remove WITH_FORTRAN knob. All the best, -- NAKATA, Maho (maho@FreeBSD.org)