Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:58:26 +0000 From: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk> To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk>, "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> Subject: Re: g95 as a system fortran compiler? Message-ID: <20091221105826.GA51422@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.1.99.0912211136400.7608@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> References: <d873d5be0912201647t25796ffdidb17524368e46900@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.1.99.0912211136400.7608@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 11:54:29AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Sun, 20 Dec 2009, b. f. wrote: > > The decision to remove the Fortran compiler from the base system was > > made long ago, and will probably not be reversed now. There is no > > Fortran code in the base system, and Fortran is needed only by a > > minority of users. > > With even popular scripting languages residing in ports, not the > base system, it really would be hard to argue for Fortran being > part of the system compiler. That, and FreeBSD has been notorious > for letting the system compiler and toolchain rot (sorry, it's hard > to find a friendlier term), so users would not be served too well > by such a move, especially seeing how actively and quickly GCC > Fortran develops in contrast. This level of agility is really > where our Ports Collection shines. yes, I get it now, it makes sense > > Yes, it's unfortunate that the gcc maintainers discontinued support > > for a number of architectures. But maybe someone will step forward > > and fix it? Or llvm? In the meantime, why don't you ask gerald@ to > > make the default Fortran compiler on ia64 the latest version of > > gfortran that will still work on that architecture? You can do it > > yourself by making some small local patches to ports/Mk/bsd.gcc.mk, > > and to the relevant lang/gcc4X port, while you are waiting for him ... > > Anton has been working with me and really has been trying to get > (upstream) attention. With FreeBSD being a niche OS and Itanium > going the way of the Alpha and the Dodo, this is not a healthy > intersection, sadly, and nobody has stepped up yet to fix the > issue for real though some advice has been given. :-( > > ( http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40959 ) > > Using different compiler versions on different architectures is > going to make other ports maintainers pretty unhappy campers and > would not see a lot of testing, so I would not recommend going > down that route, nor would I want to make ports more complicated > when that only benefits one or two users globally. I agree -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091221105826.GA51422>