Well MacPorts is ready to do binary distribution: how would that ability change your your prospects?
"Takeshi Enomoto" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >A few years ago sci port maintainers agreed to use gcc43 (now gcc44) >as defaut. >I prefer g95 but I accepted it since gfortran is a majority >has more features (cray pointers, OpenMP) and has become as reliable as g95. > >There is a drawback. >It takes hours to build gcc4x to obtain gfortran. >g95 requires less since it only builds c and fortran. >Once gcc4x is installed it keeps rebuilding upon revision or version updates. > >gcc4x could be built quickly if fortran, java, and objc were variants >or they were separate ports. > >I need fortran at work and I like it but it is a problem for sci apps in >MacPorts. >It is better to avoid fortran as a default if possible when writing a port. >Recently I try to make fortran as variant >if fortran is required to build a fortran interface (eg. plplot, grib_api). > >ATLAS also needs a long time. >I am asking the maintainer of octave to add no_atlas variant. ><http://trac.macports.org/ticket/21797> >It has been a reasonable choice to use atlas >since there is a problem linking to some functions in Apple's accelerate. >This was especially true with g95. >I came up with a solution posted in the url above. > >Takeshi > >_______________________________________________ >macports-dev mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
