darwin may lose primary target status on FSF gcc

[Toby Peterson]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 17:18, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 06:41:04PM -0500, Brian Barnes wrote:
>>
>> Well, except for the fact that development of a llvm-based replacement
>> is not proceeding, no plans exist for it to proceed, would have to be
>> started from scratch, may not be free, and would take years... but
>> you're still missing the point: Jack and I are pessimistic about a free,
>> feature-complete llvm-based replacement _ever_ existing for Fortran.
>> Besides, if gcc/gfortran 4.5 doesn't work on OS X, I lose an update to my
>> normal toolchain, and I'm trying to get work done here!
>>
>> I'd also prefer to be able to use the same free compiler (gcc/gfortran)
>> for development on both OS X and linux (since most HPC codes will
>> eventually be run on linux machines for data collection).  The
>> alternative, buying the Intel compiler to get work done, is just more
>> fodder for the people that want to talk about the "Apple Tax".
>>
>> Brian
>> _______________________________________________
>> macports-dev mailing list
>> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
>> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
>
>   What some folks here miss is that a major chunk of the MacPorts
> and Fink user base are scientific or engineering users. You might
> find a few into the geek trick of running Gnome or KDE under MacOS X
> but in terms of actual productive work, those packages are marginal
> to what many folks are using these packaging systems for. I would
> also point out that Fink has seen many users migrate over due to
> the paucity of scientific packages in MacPorts. This might account
> for the blase attitude here.

I still don't see how this is relevant to this list. MacPorts can't do
anything about what platforms gcc does or does not support.

Anyway, please go use Fink if you find MacPorts insufficient for your needs.

- Toby