From owner-freebsd-fortran@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 9 23:18:12 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fortran@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8DF985F for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:18:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6AC1321 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r69NI9YH092968; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:18:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) id r69NI83C092967; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:18:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:18:08 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: mexas@bristol.ac.uk Subject: Re: why fortran mailing list? Message-ID: <20130709231808.GA92444@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <201307091642.r69GgjXF071178@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201307091642.r69GgjXF071178@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-fortran@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-fortran@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Fortran on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 23:18:12 -0000 On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:42:45PM +0100, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: > Steve, you beat me to post the first message... Well, I scan the email archives every few days, and I was surprised to see a Fortran specific list. > I suggested this list in: > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2013-June/022145.html > > In addition to the reasons in that post, > here's one more: this list might > be a better maintainer than ports@ for > several fortran related ports. > The few ports that I use, which need Fortran, seem to just work. This is probably due to the backwards compatibility of Fortran 2008 with F2003, F95, F90, and F77. OpenMPI is the only Fortran code that I routinely build outside of the ports. -- Steve