Martin Costabel wrote:
[]
I'll do a comparison with g95 soon.
Still replying to myself...
The first tests show g95 much faster. Half the compiling time and
executables quite a bit faster. The tests I have here are now running
too fast to be really significant (0.35sec vs 0.51sec isn't); I'll
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
[]
Shantonu just wrote:
odcctools-20060413 is now available. It is based on Apple
cctools-590.36 and ld64-26.0.81
http://www.opendarwin.org/downloads/odcctools-20060413.tar.bz2
Yep, works. At least gfortran is able to build executables now, without
complaining about
On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 07:57 +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
Is the 20060226 snapshot sufficient or does one need cvs head? In the
latter case, it would be nice if you could make a new snapshot so that
the Fink odcctools package could be updated. I am building now with the
Fink
David R. Morrison wrote:
[]
I'm going to put the .info file I used for the April 1 snapshot into my
experimental directory, in case it is useful for anyone. But note that
this should *not* be added to fink until we sort out what to do about
the changes in shared libraries.
With the April 8
Just FYI, my experiments with gfortran-4.0.3 from the gnu stable release
(Mar 10 I think) have been encouraging. If I compile with -O0, all of the
ca. 150 fortran programs in my ccp4 package compile and work without any
run-time errors, which is more than I can say for gfortran on Debian
On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 23:00 +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
David R. Morrison wrote:
[]
I'm going to put the .info file I used for the April 1 snapshot into my
experimental directory, in case it is useful for anyone. But note that
this should *not* be added to fink until we sort out what
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 23:00 +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
David R. Morrison wrote:
[]
I'm going to put the .info file I used for the April 1 snapshot into my
experimental directory, in case it is useful for anyone. But note that
this should *not* be added to fink until
Yesterday I impulse-purchased an imac intel.
Today, in order to avoid parental responsibilities, I am trying to
get fink working.
(I accidently transfered my older /sw from my G4 laptop and a
surprising amount works, but today moved that out of the way and
started anew.)
My first
William Scott wrote:
Yesterday I impulse-purchased an imac intel.
Today, in order to avoid parental responsibilities, I am trying to get
fink working.
(I accidently transfered my older /sw from my G4 laptop and a surprising
amount works, but today moved that out of the way and started
Martin Costabel wrote:
William Scott wrote:
Yesterday I impulse-purchased an imac intel.
Today, in order to avoid parental responsibilities, I am trying to
get fink working.
(I accidently transfered my older /sw from my G4 laptop and a
surprising amount works, but today moved that out of
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 12:07 -0600, Jeff Whitaker wrote:
Bill:
g95 does work on intel (gfortran doesn't). I've recently modified
octave, fftw, and scipy-py to use g95. I'll be working on converting
all packages to use g95.
The latest snapshot of gcc-4.2's gfortran should also work on
Thanks. But I could not figure out how to get 4.2 with subversion (I can
do it for 4.1).
For laughs, I returned to the stable release, 4.0.3, and found gfortran
4.0.3 compiles on intel. I am trying now to use it to compile ccp4. (I
got mixed results with g95, but it helped with other
On Apr 9, 2006, at 4:11 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 12:07 -0600, Jeff Whitaker wrote:
Bill:
g95 does work on intel (gfortran doesn't). I've recently modified
octave, fftw, and scipy-py to use g95. I'll be working on converting
all packages to use g95.
The latest
On Apr 9, 2006, at 7:11 PM, William Scott wrote:
Thanks. But I could not figure out how to get 4.2 with subversion
(I can do it for 4.1).
You don't need to use subversion, since they release weekly snapshots
of the code.
For laughs, I returned to the stable release, 4.0.3, and
14 matches
Mail list logo
