| 1 |
Michael Schreckenbauer wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Freitag, 24. Juni 2011, 08:04:43 schrieb Nikos Chantziaras: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On 06/24/2011 01:16 AM, Dale wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> If it works with fortran turned on, I'd leave it alone. With hindsight, |
| 7 |
>>> I should have left well enough alone anyway. It wasn't hurting a thing. |
| 8 |
>>> Watch the elog messages. It will tell you at some point to either enable |
| 9 |
>>> fortran or emerge some other package that I forget the name of. That one |
| 10 |
>>> package pulled several dependencies on my rig. YMMV. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>> Well, as I said in another post, I do have -fortan in my make.conf and |
| 13 |
>> there are no problems. I do not have programs installed that need a |
| 14 |
>> fortran compiler. And I do not have kde-meta installed; that's a waste |
| 15 |
>> of resources. I only install what I actually need. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> You have no programs, that *need* fortran, but it could well be, that you have |
| 18 |
> programs installed, that perform better when compiled with a fortran compiler. |
| 19 |
> I think of sci-libs/fftw here as an example. It's used by programs like |
| 20 |
> blender, imagemagick and maybe some others. The developers of said library use |
| 21 |
> fortran, because they benchmarked it. If you disable fortran, you use the |
| 22 |
> slower C fallback solution. If you disable fftw in those packages, you get a |
| 23 |
> slower implementation too afaik. |
| 24 |
> After all, gentoo is a source based distribution. We all already have a couple |
| 25 |
> of languages installed. There's a C compiler a standard user will never use. |
| 26 |
> There's a C++ compiler only used by programmers. We all have them, only to |
| 27 |
> compile programs, that need them. |
| 28 |
> Why not enable fortran, even if it's only optional, to get the best of the |
| 29 |
> available implementations? In the end it's only one programming language more |
| 30 |
> installed on your system. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Regards, |
| 33 |
> Michael |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I just wonder if that is why Cantor was set up to use fortran by |
| 38 |
default. Not because it is smaller, requires a few less package but |
| 39 |
that it is what it is designed to run off of. It may well work with |
| 40 |
something else but not as fast, not as good or something else we don't |
| 41 |
know about. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Just makes me think again on this one. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Dale |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
:-) :-) |
Archives