sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?
- From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:32:09 +0200
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 03:05:24AM +0200, Thomas Orgis wrote:
> Does someone (possibly somone who hacked our fortran spell in the past...)
> have some remarks about the outcome of this one:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40583
>
> ? I am fairly certain that the current spell (well, fortran 4.3.3)
> installed /usr/bin/gfortran (the "driver"?)...
> Are we missing something else?
> Also, do we really need to manage a spec file in the spell? GCC folks did
> not comment on that one, but neither does the install manual mention that
> one has to hack spec files for standar behaviour (or I'm blind at this time
> of night).
>
> Well, I thought it'd be good to drop a query before going to sleep... let
> you folks work something out while I can dream away;-)
The spec file is there so that the gcc frontend knows how to compile
fortran programs (by calling gfortran). This is the same for all split
gcc spells. In a normal setup where the whole suite is compiled at once,
the specfile is built at compiletime including all that information.
--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org
-
[SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?,
Thomas Orgis, 06/29/2009
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/30/2009
- Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?, Thomas Orgis, 06/30/2009
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] In what way is our gfortran install broken?,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/30/2009
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.