Sébastien Maret <sebastien.ma...@icloud.com> writes: > Le 17 avr. 2014 à 18:13, Sean Farley <s...@macports.org> a écrit : > >> Sébastien Maret <sebastien.ma...@icloud.com> writes: >> >>> Le 17 avr. 2014 à 01:19, Sean Farley <s...@macports.org> a écrit : >>> >>>> Sébastien Maret <sebastien.ma...@icloud.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Le 27 mars 2014 à 22:03, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org> a écrit : >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 27, 2014, at 09:14, Sébastien Maret wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I’m writing a portfile for a software written in C/C++ and Fortran77/90: >>>>>>> http://trac.macports.org/ticket/42886 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Following a comment macsforever2000, I’ve modified my original port to >>>>>>> provide several fortran compiler variants. However, my port requires >>>>>>> that CC, CXX, CPP, and FC/F77 are all from a gcc variant. For example, >>>>>>> it's not possible to compile it using CC=clang and FC=gfortran-mp-4.8. >>>>>>> How can I modify it so that all compilers come from the same compiler >>>>>>> suite? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks in advance for your advices. >>>>>> >>>>>> You do know that as of Mavericks, trying to compile C++ code with >>>>>> anything other than clang is a fool’s errand, right? >>>>>> >>>>>> https://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#libcpp >>>>> >>>>> No, I didn’t know that. >>>>> >>>>>> *Why* is it not possible to compile your software using CC=clang and >>>>>> FC=gfortran-mp-4.8? >>>>> >>>>> I tried that but the compilation failed. I don’t exactly why but I’ll >>>>> have a closer look. >>>> >>>> Sorry for the late reply, but it took me a while to catch up. Ryan is >>>> right, of course. You should really figure out why they aren't compiling >>>> and try to fix those errors. >>> >>> Thanks for your answer. >>> >>> I found the problem: the link was done against libstdc++ instead if libc++. >>> I’ve fixed this and I’ve just posted a revised version of the port on the >>> tracker. >> >> Looking at the portfile, things seem mostly fine. A few comments (which >> will hopefully help start documenting the compilers portgroup :-) >> >> - compilers.choose is really meant to serve as a way to isolate a c-only >> or fortran-only build; since you specify both, you don't need it > > But isn’t this needed to set both CC, FC and CPP ?
No, if you leave compilers.choose blank, then it will set all the compilers. >> - removing the clang variants only stops macport's clang compilers from >> being used; this is fine but since you don't need c++ you could mix >> clang with gfortran > > Indeed I do need C++. And since a Fortran compiler is also needed, I would > prefer to compiling Fortran and C with compilers from the same compiler suite > (GCC) to avoid link problems. In addition the package requires CPP from GCC > to compile properly (it is used in a non-standard way to pre-process Fortran > code, and this does not work with Apple’s CPP). If you need C++, then you forgot to mention it in compilers.choose (missing 'cxx'). Also, "non-standard way to pre-process Fortran code" ... I didn't realize Fortran had a standard ;-P > In fact I removed the clang variants because clang does not compile Fortran > (same for drgaonegg). Why are variants present when require_fortran is set ? But dragonegg does compiler Fortran? That's mostly why it existed. >> - what is it with IRAM, Labri, and Enseeiht not using autoconf? is >> everyone in France allergic to autotools? > > I’m not... In fact, I would love them to use autotools. It would make the > packaging a lot easier. I’ll forward your comment to them :-) MUMPS and SCOTCH code development can only be measured on geological timescales. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
