Re: gfortran

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost>]

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:41:50AM +0300, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
> David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 05:32:27PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >  > > I started a similar discussion a couple years ago.  The response was that
> >  > > g95 is the only thing that works on many platforms and pkgsrc is committed
> >  > > to portability.
> >  > 
> >  > That's not the point. The point is that all the alternative packages
> >  > like gcc49 etc are much more heavy by including things like the Java
> >  > backend. You can easily select a different implementation, but for
> >  > casual users, it is way too heavy. That ignores all the usual problem of
> >  > dealing with multiple GCC versions at the same time. We hit some of them
> >  > due to rpath ordering already.
> >
> > So why not have a gcc48-fortran package (or whatever) that builds just
> > the fortran compiler?
> 
> Because of libtool.

We already have a separate libtool package for Fortran using things.

Joerg