Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:51:01 +0900 (JST) From: NAKATA Maho <chat95@mac.com> To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/gcc40 Makefile distinfo pkg-plist Message-ID: <20050304.165101.424241247.chat95@mac.com> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In Message-ID: <20050303194307.GA16309@dragon.nuxi.com>
David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> 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)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050304.165101.424241247.chat95>