> Yes, I know. Now, how many ports need this treatment? Not many ports really use fortran to build. I don't have and never install fortran (and tcsh). If some port really need f77 (aka g77) I'll install fortran and build this package. Offtopic: what is about to remove TCSH too, or add it to ports collection? I also never build and install TCHS and have found only one port, which depends on this shell: OpenOffice. OO doesn't depend on TCSH after install, but I should convet some build files from OO distribution to sh(1) compatiable. > > Do we cleanup the sys.mk file? Grep for FC, f77, .f > Do we add .F90, .f90, and .mod? I think, we should add them, but not remove ... and also add PROG_XXX (or via PROG_LANG) support to bsd.prog.mk. Becouse <bsd.*.mk> files are very simple to use(but they are not commented well) and when fortran program contains more than one file, it's too hard to simplify your makefiles. -- Best regards, Arseny NasokinReceived on Sat May 27 2006 - 22:26:16 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:56 UTC