installing ifc at the moment (version conflict)

[Alexander Leidinger]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 15:51:12 -0500
"Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <hawk at slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote:

ifc maintainer CCed.

> So now I have l_fc_pc_8.0.039.tar.gz and l_fc_pc_8.0.039_pe043.tar.gz.
> I edited the Make file so that 
> 
> #PATCHLEVEL=    ${PORTVERSION:C/(.+p)(.+)$/pe\2/}
> PATCHLEVEL=     pe043
> 
> This installed the patched version (with the help of NO_CHECKSUM).

This is not enough. The icc port has the "intel-patch" target in the
makefile. This needs to be used for ifc too.

> I'm guessing that there's a cleaner way to do this  . . .
> 
> AFter a bit more mucking about, I've found that I have to change the
> extension from f95 to f90 for ifort to recognize it.
> 
> Finally, a running compiler.  And then: *wham*.
> 
> slytherin ttyp1:dpt>ifort dphs1.f90 
> /usr/local/intel_fc_80/lib/libifcore.a(for_diags.o): In function
> `redirect_stderr':
> for_diags.o(.text+0x967): undefined reference to `freopen64'
> /usr/local/intel_fc_80/lib/libifcore.a(for_open_proc.o): In function
> `for__open_proc':
> for_open_proc.o(.text+0x1619): undefined reference to `lseek64'
> for_open_proc.o(.text+0x16b9): undefined reference to `lseek64'
> 
> and so forth.  I'm guessing that this is some kind of library mismatch.

Remember, this is not a native port. It's a linux port "hacked" to
produce FreeBSD binaries. I think you have to add a lseek64 wrapper into
lang/ifc/files/linux_file.c.

> The only dependency seems to be an extraction dependency upon a file from
> rpm2cpio--doesn't this mean that it should only be depending upon its
> own files (or base system file) to function?

Yes.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
           I will be available to get hired in April 2004.

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7