Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 21:25:17 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> Cc: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Removal of Fortran from the base system Message-ID: <20060527042517.GA3503@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <672BC9B0-5BE8-41CF-B5F0-5E00DD686A54@orthanc.ca> References: <20060527024407.GA2525@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <D65FE4A4-0975-465D-807A-9F7FF93763C8@orthanc.ca> <20060527035306.GH744@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <672BC9B0-5BE8-41CF-B5F0-5E00DD686A54@orthanc.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 09:12:50PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > On May 26, 2006, at 8:53 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > >- Nothing in the base system depends on FORTRAN. > > I'm sure you could make that argument for half of the programs in / > usr/bin. > > I don't have a problem with unbundling per-se. I do have a problem > with the totally specious arguments that have been put forth so far > to justify Fortran's removal. If there are real reasons for it, > let's hear them. > Lyndon, I'm listed as one of the official GCC maintainers for gfortran. g77 is dead, gone, not available with GCC 4.1.1. gfortran is is, IMHO, a good compiler but it has warts and bugs. Maintaining it in the tree will slow down the availability of bug fixes. Relegating it to ports will allow patches and bug fixes to be incorporate at a much higher rate. -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060527042517.GA3503>