| 1 |
On 01/12/2014 02:53 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: |
| 2 |
> fortran: |
| 3 |
> Do we want to keep enabling fortran by default? The majority of users will |
| 4 |
> never get the urge to install a fortran package, and the fortran eclass handles |
| 5 |
> those that do. I think it should be treated as all the other optional |
| 6 |
> languages and disabled by default, but I'd like to know if there are other |
| 7 |
> opinions. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
A lot of "popular" fortran code is old scientific stuff without a build |
| 10 |
system, license, upstream etc. that isn't going to be in the tree for |
| 11 |
that reason. Some of these have only "install gcc" for build |
| 12 |
instructions, so it might cause confusion for a few minutes if "gcc" |
| 13 |
can't compile fortran. The only popular modern example I have on hand is |
| 14 |
sage[1]. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The two easy choices for what-to-do are, |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
* Disable everything by default. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
* USE-default everything to match GCC's default --enable-languages[2] |
| 21 |
(c, c++, fortran, java, objc) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Either one is fine. A one-time gcc rebuild for fortran is not a big deal |
| 24 |
and at that point is probably the least of your problems. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
[1] http://www.sagemath.org/ |
| 28 |
[2] http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html |
Archives