Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 15:51:12 -0500 From: "Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <hawk@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: installing ifc at the moment (version conflict) Message-ID: <20040325205112.GD24906@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> In-Reply-To: <20040324175937.04014407@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <20040324163317.GA24906@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> <20040324175937.04014407@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 05:59:37PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 11:33:17 -0500
> "Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <hawk@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote:
> > Is there currently a way to get ifc to install?
> > The port is for 8.0.039, but intel's site has 8.0.039_pe043.
> > I've tried adding the suffix in the port and running with NO_CHECKSUM=yes,
> > but I get
> I assume ifc v8 needs to be handled the same as icc v8, so _pe043 is an
> incremental patch to 039. Have a look at the lang/icc port, how we
> handle this there.
Hmm, more poking seems to find the problem.
The regular file listing doesn't have the base compiler; I was trying to
just use the patch.
I found another listing after stepping through a couple of menus (boy is
that a horribly organized website!) that produced a compiler file for
.039.
So now I have l_fc_pc_8.0.039.tar.gz and l_fc_pc_8.0.039_pe043.tar.gz.
I edited the Make file so that
#PATCHLEVEL= ${PORTVERSION:C/(.+p)(.+)$/pe\2/}
PATCHLEVEL= pe043
This installed the patched version (with the help of NO_CHECKSUM).
I'm guessing that there's a cleaner way to do this . . .
AFter a bit more mucking about, I've found that I have to change the
extension from f95 to f90 for ifort to recognize it.
Finally, a running compiler. And then: *wham*.
slytherin ttyp1:dpt>ifort dphs1.f90
/usr/local/intel_fc_80/lib/libifcore.a(for_diags.o): In function
`redirect_stderr':
for_diags.o(.text+0x967): undefined reference to `freopen64'
/usr/local/intel_fc_80/lib/libifcore.a(for_open_proc.o): In function
`for__open_proc':
for_open_proc.o(.text+0x1619): undefined reference to `lseek64'
for_open_proc.o(.text+0x16b9): undefined reference to `lseek64'
and so forth. I'm guessing that this is some kind of library mismatch.
The only dependency seems to be an extraction dependency upon a file from
rpm2cpio--doesn't this mean that it should only be depending upon its
own files (or base system file) to function?
hawk, baffled
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign
dochawk@psu.edu 111 Hiller (814) 375-4846 \ / against HTML mail
These opinions will not be those of X and postings.
Penn State until it pays my retainer. / \
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040325205112.GD24906>