#20103: Use a common default variant for a recent gcc port in scientific packages -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: alakazam@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 1.7.1 Keywords: | Port: octave arpack -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- I was discussing with the maintainer of the Arpack port (mmoll) by mail recently the fact that several (octave, arpack) scientific related ports depend on different gcc4X ports by default, and do not share common variants. This is in particular significant for ports that have cross dependencies and/or use fortran. For instance, octave depends on g95, and has 2 variants : gcc42 and gcc43. Arpack depends on gcc42 and also has variants for g95 and gcc43. py25-scipy depends on gcc43 and has variants for gcc42 and gcc44, etc. Marc suggested that we switch to gcc43 as a default variant for both octave and arpack, and I think we should extend this to all scientific related ports. Indeed, the initial issue arose when I tried compiling octave-arpack (depends on both octave and arpack), since two (very large) compiler packages where getting pulled and compiled. I'd like some feedback on this issue from maintainers of scientific related packages, I've tried to CC most of those I could think of. Thanks ! mww (maintainer for the gcc ports), what's your take on the best gcc compiler to use (gcc42, gcc43, gcc44) ? -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/20103> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS