[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

**To**:**Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>****Subject**:**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw****From**:**Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost>**- Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 09:40:34 -0400

Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> writes: > The core of the issue is that you can't really mix different Fortran > implementations. Because they have different ABI/calling conventions, and procedure calls among fortran code in .o files compiled by fortran77/fortran95 compilers won't work right? I think you're saying that it's not about them being different compilers, but about different languages wtih different ABI rules. So a given system must either have only f77-compiled code, and just not be able to use fortran95 code, or it must have used a fortran95 compiler for everything? I wonder if the NetBSD base system should enable the fortran part of gcc. It's almost like fortran is making a resurgence and being more normal. But that's totally separate from what pkgsrc should do.

**Attachment:
pgpPQu3eIln3F.pgp**

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw***From:*Patrick Welche

**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw***From:*Joerg Sonnenberger

**References**:**Make g95 optional in math/fftw***From:*Martin Husemann

**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw***From:*Thomas Klausner

**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw***From:*Joerg Sonnenberger

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw** - Next by Date:
**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw** - Previous by Thread:
**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw** - Next by Thread:
**Re: Make g95 optional in math/fftw** - Indexes: