On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 13:30:41 -0500 Diane Bruce <d...@db.net> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 06:05:15PM +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote: >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 10:16:04 -0500 Diane Bruce <d...@db.net> wrote: >>> Except python doesn't have an rpath which is why this keeps coming >>> up over and over again. >> >> Maybe we should just add the gcc rpaths to the python ports LDFLAGS >> without depending on gcc. Then python should use gcc libgcc_s when >> it exists and fall back to base system libgcc_s when it doesn't. > > Right. Or just provide a shell shim to LD_PRELOAD IFF it is noticed > a specific port will require a fortran built binary module later. > >> Maybe we should compile *all* ports with gcc rpaths without depending >> on gcc, just like we already compile everything with -fstack-protector >> in LDFLAGS. >> >> There's also the fact that gfortran behaves differently from the C >> compilers (both clang and gcc) when it comes to libgcc_s. Gfortran >> always links with libgcc_s. The C compilers link with libgcc.a first >> and then with libgcc_s only as needed. This eliminates almost all > > What is really happening is gfortran links with libgfortran (surprise > surprise) and libgfortran has the requirement for @GCC_4.6.0 or later > >> links with libgcc_s. The only ones left are for exception handling >> and stack unwinding and gcc libgcc_s and base system libgcc_s are >> version compatible for that so it doesn't matter which one gets picked >> up. The attached patch for lang/gcc8 makes gfortran behave just like >> the C compilers. > > Something like this was tried already. I'll have to dig into > my old notes.
With my patch libgfortran only needs GCC_4.2.0 and works with base libgcc_s. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
