| 1 |
Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 22:29:12 -0500, Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>>> I guess my first post was correct after all. Enable fortran USE flag |
| 6 |
>>>> and keep things as it was before it got changed. It was working |
| 7 |
>>>> fine. |
| 8 |
>>>> |
| 9 |
>>> Isn't that flag enabled by default? All you have yo do is not disable |
| 10 |
>>> it. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>> You seem to have forgot the dev had changed it. Since it got noticed |
| 14 |
>> and all the dev changed it back in about a day or so. So, it was |
| 15 |
>> enabled, got disabled by a dev then got enabled again by the same dev. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> ISTR reading some mention of that. Do you mean the profile was changed? |
| 18 |
> That sounds a bit naughty, changing a profile should be done on a version |
| 19 |
> bump IMO. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I don't know for sure where it was changed but the dev that did the |
| 25 |
change posted this: |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> We restructured the dependency chain for fortran support, which includes |
| 28 |
> a compile test now. The failure can be seen above. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> The Problem was in short, USE=fortran was enabled by default for linux |
| 31 |
> arches, but people tend to disable it. Depending on gcc[fortran] doesn't |
| 32 |
> work completely as gcc:4.4[fortran] and gcc:4.5[-fortran] with gcc-4.5 |
| 33 |
> select can be installed, which would full fill the dependency but |
| 34 |
> nevertheless doesn't give a working compiler. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> So now packages depend on virtual/fortran and use an eclass to check for |
| 37 |
> a working compiler. So if you see this message, this means you somehow |
| 38 |
> worked around gcc[fortran]. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> justin |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
That make sense? |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Dale |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
:-) :-) |
Archives