Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:38:48 -0500 From: "Richard E. Hawkins" <dochawk@psu.edu> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: lf95 (lahey fortran): follow bsd way, or linux fortran way Message-ID: <200202271538.g1RFcm506257@fac13.ds.psu.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I have it working except for cleanly applying the patches (which i'll do in about an hour). It compiles, and makes programs that executes. Right now, I have it working in the manner that the linux fortrans function: It has it's own directory in $PREFIX, and *everything* is in there. WIth an an installed commercial linux compiler, the standard behavior is to source /somewhere/its/installed/setupscript which modifies $PATH, $MANPATH , and $LD_LIBRARY_PATH. This is also where commercial tech support will expect to find things. If I leave the man pages alone, treated as plain old files in pkg-plist and the like, everything is where folks used to linux fortran compilers and commercial tech support expects to find them. Additionally, it solves any issues about collisions if someone installs two compilers (I'm willing to write the ports if other vendors send the compilers, or someone else might do so as well). But it's not the bsd way. The more I think about it, the more compelling the collision issue seems to be. And the tech support is another serious concern. Is there anything else I should be considering before breaking protocol? hawk -- Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign dochawk@psu.edu Smeal 178 (814) 375-4700 \ / against HTML mail These opinions will not be those of X and postings. Penn State until it pays my retainer. / \ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200202271538.g1RFcm506257>