1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
Hi Tom, |
5 |
|
6 |
> |>>Unless someone steps up, the intel compiler toolchain |
7 |
> |>>packages dev-lang/icc (intel cc) and dev-lang/ifc (intel fortran |
8 |
> |>>compiler) are prime candidates for removal from the tree; open bugs, |
9 |
> |>>primary maintainer is retired, and no devs have moved in to pick up the |
10 |
> |>>packages, let along touched the changeslogs in around a year. |
11 |
|
12 |
> | In case there are no security Bugs, i'd like to ask you to leave them in |
13 |
> | for the time being, I'm working on getting the latest versions (8.0/8.1) |
14 |
> | of ifort (how it is now known) and icc into the tree. The only problem |
15 |
> | are my time constraints atm :-/. Though I have ebuilds ready, it will |
16 |
> | still take some time to remove some minor itches before I'd commit them. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> Please contact me in case you need any help to test the ebuilds. I think |
19 |
> these ebuilds are far too important to be deleted from the portage tree. |
20 |
> These tools are crucial for my (and other people's) job. |
21 |
> Also add sci-libs/mkl to this list. |
22 |
|
23 |
(CCing gentoo-sci@l.g.o, as i guess i'll thus reach the majority of icc |
24 |
dependant Gentoo users) |
25 |
|
26 |
I'll appreciate any help I can get on that :-) |
27 |
|
28 |
Some of my thoughts on current problems (w/o having searched bugzilla yet!) |
29 |
|
30 |
dev-lang/icc and dev-lang/ifc |
31 |
* No support for icc/ifort in (g)cc-config. |
32 |
|
33 |
* Different naming schemes for distributed packages. A friend of mine |
34 |
has a l_intel_cc_pu_${PV}.tar.gz for his academic work. I got a |
35 |
l_intel_cc_p_${PV}.tar.gz from Intel's premier support... go |
36 |
figure... :-/ Is it valid to specify |
37 |
SRC_URI="|| ( file1 file2 )" |
38 |
in an ebuild ? Or can we use wildcards in SRC_URI? |
39 |
* icc depends on gcc's libstdc++, so changing your gcc version affects |
40 |
icc and can even break it. |
41 |
|
42 |
sci-libs/mkl |
43 |
* integration in current virtual/{blas,lapack} scheme is missing (but |
44 |
in the works for app-admin/eclectic) |
45 |
* some lapack functions have uncommon naming scheme ('z' prefix where |
46 |
'd' would be expected.) |
47 |
* distributed via binary installer that has a rpm file as payload which |
48 |
can't be extracted. Up to now, i always have to run the installer |
49 |
once to obtain the rpm file. |
50 |
|
51 |
all of the above |
52 |
* New versions need fetch restrictions turned on. This means for all |
53 |
users of the old (and free as in beer) versions some nastiness for |
54 |
the next update. Also, the old versions would be removed: |
55 |
Slotting? if yes, based on what? |
56 |
|
57 |
icc/ifc use flags: |
58 |
* These are scary. Using a different compiler should not be achieved |
59 |
by setting a useflag, neither local nor global one. |
60 |
|
61 |
I'd like to have some feedback on these problems :-) |
62 |
|
63 |
Danny |
64 |
- -- |
65 |
Danny van Dyk <kugelfang@g.o> |
66 |
Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project |
67 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
68 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) |
69 |
|
70 |
iD8DBQFCgPgXaVNL8NrtU6IRAmb2AJ4ryP18mNxTUcS/WdfHNi+LDYsXlwCgplGz |
71 |
dUZIpvoc+FP0gLXgzaaF/aU= |
72 |
=7/T2 |
73 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
74 |
-- |
75 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |