On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 03:52:58PM +0200, Jeremy Lea wrote:
...
Many people don't seem to understand that FreeBSD can be used for
workstations as well as servers and Fortran is *essential* on a
scientific/engineering workstation.
...
Absolutely correct. Some up-and-coming IBM simulation
Thus spake Brian Handy ha...@lambic.physics.montana.edu
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
[g77 in the source tree]
I have to agree here...I personally know noone that actually uses
Fortran...having it as an option to turn off would be nice...one less
thing to compile on a
John R. LoVerso wrote:
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
By that logic, you'd also have to add a Pascal compiler to the base system.
Does gcc has a Pascal? :-)
I think we have a Pascal doc under share.
Neither makes much sense when they can
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 11:28:52AM -0500, Glenn Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 03:52:58PM +0200, Jeremy Lea wrote:
I always thought the criteria for inclusion of things into the base
system was:
1. Needed for 'make world';
2. Needed to get a basic functioning server up
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 11:19:21PM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
Me, I'd rather have Fortran as a port. I'd even grudgingly accept
fortune as a port, as a matter of fact. Our base system is bloated.
While a
Does gcc has a Pascal? :-)
Actually, yes. It's not a part of it yet, but drops in and builds
easily with gcc-2.8.1, and with very little extra work for egcs.
Check out http://agnes.dida.physik.uni-essen.de/~gnu-pascal/.
Unlike Modula-3 and Gnat, they wrote the front-end in C, so it's a whole
Jeremy Lea wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 11:19:21PM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
Me, I'd rather have Fortran as a port. I'd even grudgingly accept
fortune as a port, as a matter of fact. Our base
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 11:19:21PM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
Me, I'd rather have Fortran as a port. I'd even grudgingly accept
fortune as a port, as a matter of fact. Our base system is bloated.
Jeremy wrote:
6. Whoever brings patches wins.
Steve wrote:
Doesn't apply for getting something *removed* from the tree.
I've had *patches* and *ports* for f2c and f77 sitting around
for at least 2 months. Search the mailing list.
Nate's comment:
I offered to do the commit
Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77 to the base system this
weekend.
I should have posted this yesterday... but I had hoped to just get it
done. There has been suffient YES response to keep Fortran in the base
system. As someone posted to the point: g77 will add very little
additional
Yeah, I'm serious, I would really like gcj+libgcj, to get java stuff
compiled (non portably) into binaries on FreeBSD.
1. I agree in principle.
2. I'd sort of like to see a second release of this, at least, before
we start talking seriously of bringing it into -current. I predict
a
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, Joe Abley wrote:
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 03:16:41AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com writes:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Brian Handy wrote:
On 9 Apr 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
[4 people said YES! Add g77!]
I beg your pardon? You're adding g77 to the system because you know of
four people who would find it useful? Where's the logic in that?
Well, statistically speaking, that's
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 10:37:55AM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Geez, and I used to think it was only the commercial OSs that had a
problem with bloat and creeping featurisms ... :( Chuck's idea makes more
sense...how many programs does the average system run that needs a fortran
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Brian Handy wrote:
On 9 Apr 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
[4 people said YES! Add g77!]
I beg your pardon? You're adding g77 to the system because you know of
four people who would find it useful? Where's the logic in that?
[cc trimmed to avoid cross-posting]
Jeremy Lea wrote:
I always thought the criteria for inclusion of things into the base
system was:
1. Needed for 'make world';
2. Needed to get a basic functioning server up and running;
3. Something usefull only within FreeBSD (like the kernel ;),
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
[g77 in the source tree]
I have to agree here...I personally know noone that actually uses
Fortran...having it as an option to turn off would be nice...one less
thing to compile on a buildworld...
I know *lots* of people that use FORTRAN. That
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
By that logic, you'd also have to add a Pascal compiler to the base system.
Neither makes much sense when they can both be ports (or packages) easily
addable at install or compile time by the small % of the FreeBSD
I always thought the criteria for inclusion of things into the base
system was:
1. Needed for 'make world';
2. Needed to get a basic functioning server up and running;
3. Something usefull only within FreeBSD (like the kernel ;), or
4. Can't be effectively built outside of /usr/src.
David O'Brien wrote:
Speaking of ports, I have a working port of f2c and a new
f77(1) wrapper sitting on my machine.
I guess naming is going to get sticky here... if f2c has `f77', then *if*
I put egcs/g77 in the main tree, do I install it as `g77' or `f77'?
The Egcs port installs it as
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, Thomas David Rivers wrote:
Geez, and I used to think it was only the commercial OSs that had a
problem with bloat and creeping featurisms ... :( Chuck's idea makes more
sense...how many programs does the average system run that needs a fortran
compiler? *raised
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 03:52:58PM +0200, Jeremy Lea wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 10:37:55AM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Geez, and I used to think it was only the commercial OSs that had a
problem with bloat and creeping featurisms ... :( Chuck's idea makes more
sense...how
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999 p...@phoenix.volant.org wrote:
I always thought the criteria for inclusion of things into the base
system was:
1. Needed for 'make world';
2. Needed to get a basic functioning server up and running;
3. Something usefull only within FreeBSD (like the kernel
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
Me, I'd rather have Fortran as a port. I'd even grudgingly accept
fortune as a port, as a matter of fact. Our base system is bloated.
While a lot of widely used programs are only available through
ports, a lot of
On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, Rod Taylor wrote:
Right or wrong, you forgot:
5. BSD tradition.
Case 5 justifies Fortran.
Me, I'd rather have Fortran as a port. I'd even grudgingly accept
fortune as a port, as a matter of fact. Our base system is bloated.
While a lot of widely used
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, eagle wrote:
Whelp... I vote to break tradition. Hack away...The installer takes
care of alot of stuff like ports installs. Perhaps different standard
setups could be configured as ports. Ie. 'bloated setup' would require
all the ports which are currently
On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, Chuck Robey wrote:
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, eagle wrote:
Whelp... I vote to break tradition. Hack away...The installer takes
care of alot of stuff like ports installs. Perhaps different standard
setups could be configured as ports. Ie. 'bloated setup' would
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, eagle wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, Chuck Robey wrote:
On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, eagle wrote:
Whelp... I vote to break tradition. Hack away...The installer takes
care of alot of stuff like ports installs. Perhaps different standard
setups could be
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
--
-- David(obr...@nuxi.com -or- obr...@freebsd.org)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with
On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
Personally, yes, lets do it. In fact, I'd like to hear serious
discussion, now
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 04:50:56PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
--
-- David(obr...@nuxi.com -or-
David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com writes:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
I beg your pardon? You're adding g77 to the system because you know of
four people
On 9 Apr 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com writes:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
I beg your pardon? You're adding
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 03:16:41AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com writes:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
I beg
* From: David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com
* I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
* system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
* to the base system this weekend.
Sorry, I wasn't paying enough attention I guess. What's wrong with it
On 9 Apr 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
[4 people said YES! Add g77!]
I beg your pardon? You're adding g77 to the system because you know of
four people who would find it useful? Where's the logic in that?
Well, statistically speaking, that's a bunch of ayes and no noes.
Lots of things
Satoshi - the Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
* From: David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com
* I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
* system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
* to the base system this weekend.
Sorry, I wasn't paying
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
David O'Brien obr...@nuxi.com writes:
I've only heard back from 4 folks about adding EGCS's g77 to the base
system -- all 4 said yes. Unless I get more feedback, I will add g77
to the base system this weekend.
I beg your pardon? You're adding g77 to the system
38 matches
Mail list logo
