g95 as a system fortran compiler?

Anton Shterenlikht mexas at bristol.ac.uk
Sun Dec 20 20:50:56 UTC 2009

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 10:24:37AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:46:19AM +0000, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> > 
> > I understand that gfortran is not an ideal choice for
> > many reasons, not least that it doesn't build on ia64.
> Do you have any details to support this claim (other than
> the fact that you can't get gcc to build on ia64)?

I meant all the talk (most of which is way above my head)
about gcc backend being far from ideal. llvm/clang are often
mentioned as long term alternatives. I'm just repeating
what I've picked up from various mailing lists.

> You left out the dependency that it uses gcc-4.0.3 as it's
> base gcc.

yes, forgot about this..

> Install the g95 port and be done with it.

the problem is that gfortran44 is the default (ports/Mk/bsd.gcc.mk).
So if it doesn't build on my system, I can't get lots of
other ports. I'm not sure changing it for g95 is a good idea.

> PS:  Guess who is an active gfortran developer?

I see.. as I said, I apologise if I'm talking nosense.

Thanks for your time anyway. (I noted your reply to my
gcc bugzilla entry).


Anton Shterenlikht
Room 2.6, Queen's Building
Mech Eng Dept
Bristol University
University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK
Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944
Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list