On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 10:24:37AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:46:19AM +0000, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: > > > > I understand that gfortran is not an ideal choice for > > many reasons, not least that it doesn't build on ia64. > > Do you have any details to support this claim (other than > the fact that you can't get gcc to build on ia64)? I meant all the talk (most of which is way above my head) about gcc backend being far from ideal. llvm/clang are often mentioned as long term alternatives. I'm just repeating what I've picked up from various mailing lists. > You left out the dependency that it uses gcc-4.0.3 as it's > base gcc. yes, forgot about this.. > Install the g95 port and be done with it. the problem is that gfortran44 is the default (ports/Mk/bsd.gcc.mk). So if it doesn't build on my system, I can't get lots of other ports. I'm not sure changing it for g95 is a good idea. > PS: Guess who is an active gfortran developer? I see.. as I said, I apologise if I'm talking nosense. Thanks for your time anyway. (I noted your reply to my gcc bugzilla entry). anton -- 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 4423Received on Sun Dec 20 2009 - 19:50:56 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:59 UTC