From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Dec 16 14:42:48 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23910 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:42:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles128.castles.com [208.214.165.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA23868 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:42:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA01290; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:39:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199812162239.OAA01290@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Steve Kargl cc: bs_13943_34262@adimus.de (Benedikt Stockebrand), hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Fortran in the base system (was Re: sysinstall) In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:52:21 PST." <199812161952.LAA75064@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:39:50 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > According to Mike Smith: > > > > > > > This doesn't sound to me like any sort of justification. In fact, it > > > > looks like a specific application, and more to the point, a strong > > > > argument for having it a port. > > > > > > > > > > A 33% increase in execution time doesn't seem like a good justification? > > > > It doesn't justify it being part of the base installation. It'll slow > > down turnaround times for ``make world'' with only an almost > > negligible fraction of users actually using fortran. > > A Fortran compiler has been part of the base system since FreeBSD 1.1.5. This is not a justification. > > I'm not sure if you don't understand the distinction between the base > > system and the ports collection or don't want to accept the fact that > > fortran isn't considered "basic" functionality these days anymore. > > I fully understand the difference. I'm suggesting the replacement > of current inferior functionality with a superior solution. The superior solution would be to remove f77 and make it a port. Nothing has happened on this front because nobody that cares enough about Fortran has done anything about it. If you care, and it sounds like you do, would you be willing to help us improve the situation? -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message