Subject: Re: gcc3 deletion
To: Eric Haszlakiewicz <>
From: Patrick Welche <>
List: tech-toolchain
Date: 11/07/2006 17:01:10
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 01:27:18PM -0600, Eric Haszlakiewicz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 04:11:48PM +0000, Patrick Welche wrote:
> > tape2: {15} gfortran -v
> > Using built-in specs.
> > Target: i386-unknown-netbsdelf3.99.19
> > Configured with: /usr/src/local/gcc/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc4 --enable-languages=c,c++,java,fortran --with-mpfr=/usr/local --with-gmp=/usr/local --with-system-zlib
> > Thread model: posix
> > gcc version 4.2.0 20060519 (experimental)
> > 
> > was good enough to compile Siesta, so "Is there a reason we don't have
> > gfortran?"
> How much extra room would it take up?
> What is it needed for?  (what's Siesta?)
> How many people would use it?
> Is there a package that can be installed to easily add on the fortran support?
> Does the convinience of having it installed for the number of people that
>  would use it outweigh the drawbacks (unnecessary bloat, increased build
>  times, larger source tree) for everyone else?

The OP asked why f77 is no longer there. The above questions I think are
rather an answer to why should we add f77. I am side stepping the change of
name from f77 to gfortran. (Siesta solves many body quantum mechanics
problems - earlier versions of gfortran would fail to compile it with "not
yet implemented" errors - c.f., )