On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 02:08:57PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 01:40:10PM +0200, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 01:20:16PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 12:59:23PM +0200, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 11:20:09AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > > > On 2020/08/18 13:10, Brad Smith wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 03:58:12AM -0400, Brad Smith wrote: > > > > > > > Here is a start at an update to GCC 8.4.0. > > > > > > > > What will be the status of gfortran? Currently, on OpenBSD 6.7, > > > > in order to get a functioning gfortran I have to install lapack from > > > > ports > > > > and use /usr/ports/pobj/lapack-3.8.0/bin/gfortran > > > > > > This is a small shell wrapper around /usr/local/bin/egfortran from the > > > g95 package (g95-8.3.0p5 on OpenBSD 6.7-stable): > > > > > > $ cat /usr/ports/pobj/lapack-3.8.0/bin/gfortran > > > #!/bin/sh > > > exec /usr/local/bin/egfortran -B /usr/ports/pobj/lapack-3.8.0/bin "$@" > > > > > > > > > $ pkg_info -c g95 > > > Information for > > > https://ftp.hostserver.de/pub/OpenBSD//snapshots/packages/amd64/g95-8.3.0p7.tgz > > > > > > Comment: > > > GNU compiler collection: f95 compiler > > > > > > > > > To find packages, I recommend using the pkglocatedb package. > > > > > > $ doas pkg_add pkglocatedb > > > $ pkglocate gfortran > > > > still, it leaves in the open the question of installing (e)gfortran. > > > > I got egfortran built from source (as a part of gcc-8.3.0) in the process > > of installation of > > math/lapack > > > > Do you say that a binary package for (e)gfortan does not exist? > > Apologies for adding to the the confusion... > > When I wrote "/usr/local/bin/egfortran from the g95 package", I meant to > say that you can get egfortran by installing the "g95" package. > > This g95 package is built as part of gcc-8.3.0, so the gfotran packaged > in g95 is the same as the one you built from source. > > > Why is the package gfortran obsolete? > > If memory serves, a gfortran package did exist independently of the gcc > port but was not really used. There were conflicts between it and the > gcc-libs (so basically with almost everything), so it was decided to > remove it about 4 or 5 years ago. That's the reason for the confusing > message you got. > It's the other way around, I think. IMHO g95 package should be called gfortran--as this is what it is, and g95 made obsolete.
Indeed, g95 is the name of semi-abandoned project (last release in 2013) providing a Fortran compiler, http://g95.org/ - this is how every project (except OpenBSD?) understands g95 "brand". (IIRC g95 package used to provide g95 from g95.org, indeed). > Brad's diff will update gcc to 8.4.0 and the g95-8.4.0 package will > bundle the corresponding egfortran.
